NationStates Jolt Archive

In any event, in the question and answer session following his talk at Columbia, the Iranian president said: "I'm not saying that it [the Holocaust] didn't happen at all. This is not the judgment that I'm passing here."



for those with an open mind,
able to read beyond sound bites,
and wanting to see more of things Mr A supposedly said,
read on to the link


Anti-Semitism. Don't settle for imitations.
http://members.aol.com/bblum6/aer50.htm







That should put the matter to rest. But of course it won't. Two days later, September 26, a bill (H. R. 3675) was introduced in Congress "To prohibit Federal grants to or contracts with Columbia University", to punish the school for inviting Ahmadinejad to speak. The bill's first "finding" states that "Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for the destruction of the State of Israel {BUT HE DID NOT}, a critical ally of the United States."

That same day, comedian Jay Leno had great fun ridiculing Ahmadinejad for denying that the Holocaust ever happened "despite all the eye-witness accounts".

How long before the first linking of Iran with 9-11? Or has that already happened? How long before democracy and freedom bombs begin to fall upon the heads of the Iranian people? All the charges of anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial, along with other disinformation, are of course designed to culminate in this new crime against humanity.

honestly a poorly designed web page/blog affair isn't going to sway anyone, though I do have to say the Iranian president does have his words taken to mean something bad more or less every time he speaks (like how he plans to destroy Israel when he was only bitching about the regime)

though this is more interesting:


a bill (H. R. 3675) was introduced in Congress "To prohibit Federal grants to or contracts with Columbia University", to punish the school for inviting Ahmadinejad to speak. The bill's first "finding" states that "Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for the destruction of the State of Israel, a critical ally of the United States."

http://www.spiceadvice.com/brands/durkee/durkee-homeuse/images/spices-famous-sauce-lg.jpg

(H. R. 3675) was introduced in Congress "To prohibit Federal grants to or contracts with Columbia University",

Way to go, Federal grants to colleges are unconstitutional.

? How long before democracy and freedom bombs begin to fall upon the heads of the Iranian people?

Can't happen soon enough.

I wonder how one defines 'critical ally'.

No offense to any Israelis, but it's a tiny crust of blood-soaked dirt. Ally? Maybe. Critical? ...

honestly a poorly designed web page/blog affair isn't going to sway anyone

it's not about the hair, but what is beneath the hair that matters


unfortunately,
too many people a) still take these buffoons in dc at the word,
and b) think everyone is out to get them, including Iranians.


even if Mr A is ignorant of homosexuality,
the country he is prez of and which he has no control over foreign affairs
or security matters has passed all inspections by the International Atomic Engery A....(IAEA) to not be enriching uranium to weapons grade. which is very different from using uranium for fuel. (not that any country should use that very NON-green fuel, but...it's not weapons)

it's not about the hair, but what is beneath the hair that matters


unfortunately,
too many people a) still take these buffoons in dc at the word,
and b) think everyone is out to get them, including Iranians.


even if Mr A is ignorant of homosexuality,
the country he is prez of and which he has no control over foreign affairs
or security matters has passed all inspections by the International Atomic Engery A....(IAEA) to not be enriching uranium to weapons grade. which is very different from using uranium for fuel. (not that any country should use that very NON-green fuel, but...it's not weapons)

You can't even type a simple message properly, why would anybody take what you say seriously?

Bush denies the Armenian genocide ever happening. Gotta love double standards.

Death to both dictators.

You can't even type a simple message properly, why would anybody take what you say seriously?

i don't care if anyone takes me seriously or not.
nor do i much particularly care to live up to anyone's standard of a "proper" post.

distractions from the content, of course.


furthermore,
as if Iran, being a sovereign nation, does not have a right to have nuclear weapons if they want, while others, especially others in the region, Pakistan, India, and Israel, all have them. oh, and some country from the other side of the planet with nukes invaded one country on either side of it of which neither had nukes as a deterant, nor was trying to get them.

Bush denies the Armenian genocide ever happening. Gotta love double standards.

Death to both dictators.

Mr. Bush and Mr. Ahmadinejad are many things, but neither are dictators by any strech of the imagination.

Oh, and source plz.

You can't even type a simple message properly, why would anybody take what you say seriously?pffftt.. Grammar Nazies :rolleyes:

you think always type properly.. and you think we should take you seriously because of that?
Ah, tenez, vous êtes de la merde dans un bas de soie. --NB--

i don't care if anyone takes me seriously or not.
nor do i much particularly care to live up to anyone's standard of a "proper" post.

distractions from the content, of course.


furthermore,
as if Iran, being a sovereign nation, does not have a right to have nuclear weapons if they want, while others, especially others in the region, Pakistan, India, and Israel, all have them. oh, and some country from the other side of the planet with nukes invaded one country on either side of it of which neither had nukes as a deterant, nor was trying to get them.


Well um, that would be because their president is a nut, a total and complete nutcase. Now don't get me wrong, I don't think ANYONE should be allowed to have nukes. But if I had to top the list of people who don't get nukes for Christmas, I'd definitely have to put the Iranian president on the top five. Right next to George Bush, Kim Jon-il, Muammar al-Qaddafi, and Vladimir Putin.

And here's a newsflash for you. The reason most Americans think everyone is "out to get them" as you put it, is because of those wonderful little death to America rallies so many middle eastern countries seem to hold on a daily basis. I think that's called justifiable paranoia.

Columbia university is a disgrace.

If you don't like someone, don't fucking invite them. But to invite someone to your campus and then slag them off when you know damn well there is jack shit they can do about it makes you less than a weasel. (That's right bollinger, I'm looking at you).

I don't like amadinnerjacket in any way whatsoever. But the way Bollinger treated him was absolutely beyond the pale.

Columbia university is a disgrace.

If you don't like someone, don't fucking invite them. But to invite someone to your campus and then slag them off when you know damn well there is jack shit they can do about it makes you less than a weasel. (That's right bollinger, I'm looking at you).

I don't like amadinnerjacket in any way whatsoever. But the way Bollinger treated him was absolutely beyond the pale.

Quite so. If you invite someone to speak, have the grace to listen.

Bush denies the Armenian genocide ever happening. Gotta love double standards.

Death to both dictators.

Neither one are dictators. The religious nuts in Iran are the dictators.

Neither one are dictators. The religious nuts in Iran are the dictators.

correct. Ahmedinejad is nothing more than a dictators mouthpiece. He has no power at all, and even if he did, he would just use it to fulfill the wishes of the mullahs.

But of course, let's ignore everything that he said BEFORE that speech, because reality only exists from one second before we perceive it.

And again, shame on Columbia -- not for inviting him, but for using the opportunity to belittle him from before he began speaking.

correct. Ahmedinejad is nothing more than a dictators mouthpiece. He has no power at all, and even if he did, he would just use it to fulfill the wishes of the mullahs.


correct. Bush is nothing more than a dictators mouthpiece. He has no power at all, and even if he did, he would just use it to fulfill the wishes of the corporate oligarchs.

correct. Bush is nothing more than a dictators mouthpiece. He has no power at all, and even if he did, he would just use it to fulfill the wishes of the corporate oligarchs.

WTF have you been smoking? Give me some of it.

But of course, let's ignore everything that he said BEFORE that speech, because reality only exists from one second before we perceive it.

most of the stuff in the link I posted is correcting or clarifying things from before he showed up at Colombia University. some of it was first written by the author about a year ago



i'm actually surprised the gov't let him in on a visa.
maybe they just do it for 'leaders' of countries.
because i heard that years ago they wouldn't let the widow of Salvador Allende in to the US to speak. Allende was the democratically elected prez of Chile before Kissinger and the cia supported a coup that got him killed on september 11th so many years ago.

WTF have you been smoking? Give me some of it.

yeah.
they call it the "washington concensus"
or neo-liberalism.
sometimes the so-called "free trade" stuff is concerned with this.

think he could dismantle those over 700 known/admitted military bases in over 130 different countries that help enforce this stuff
and not risk something?

most of the stuff in the link I posted is correcting or clarifying things from before he showed up at Colombia University. some of it was first written by the author about a year ago

I love how you used the words "correcting or clarifying things".

i'm actually surprised the gov't let him in on a visa.

He was going to the United Nations. Duh.

maybe they just do it for 'leaders' of countries.

duh!

because i heard that years ago they wouldn't let the widow of Salvador Allende in to the US to speak. Allende was the democratically elected prez of Chile before Kissinger and the cia supported a coup that got him killed on september 11th so many years ago.

Ok? what year would that be?

yeah.
they call it the "washington concensus"
or neo-liberalism.
sometimes the so-called "free trade" stuff is concerned with this.

think he could dismantle those over 700 known/admitted military bases in over 130 different countries that help enforce this stuff
and not risk something?

Care to tell me what that has to do with claiming Bush is a mouthpiece for a dictator when the United States is not a Dictatorship?

I love how you used the words "correcting or clarifying things".



He was going to the United Nations. Duh.



duh!



Ok? what year would that be?


ok,
1973, September 11th
was the coup by the fascist Augusto Pinchet.

yeah.
mistranslations or out right fabrications of what he supposedly said.
corrected or clarified.
when a news source reports on something, who gives them the translation?
I probably should have put that in the post above.

Care to tell me what that has to do with claiming Bush is a mouthpiece for a dictator when the United States is not a Dictatorship?


a dictatorship is hardly ever, if ever a single person.
a dictator could never stay in power without support.
that's why i sometimes use "dictatorship system"
when referring to them sometimes.

ok,
1973, September 11th
was the coup by the fascist Augusto Pinchet.

No shit. I was not talking about the coup. I was talking about denying the dude's wife.

yeah.
mistranslations or out right fabrications of what he supposedly said.
corrected or clarified.

We've debated that enough times here and we pretty much know what he meant which was....

he wants Israel destroyed and the fact that he believes that the holocaust is overhyped. Thanks though.

when a news source reports on something, who gives them the translation?
I probably should have put that in the post above.

No we pretty much knows what was said. Thanks though for trying to rewrite speeches.

think he could dismantle those over 700 known/admitted military bases in over 130 different countries that help enforce this stuff
and not risk something?

Thats an average of 5.4 base per country, but odds most of them are in trouble spots like Tawian, South Korea, Isreal ect. But most likely thats including embasies, bases in afganastan and Iraq(not supporting the Iraq War), but from the Liberal extremist bull you've been spitting, probably half are in the US itself.

And here's a newsflash for you. The reason most Americans think everyone is "out to get them" as you put it, is because of those wonderful little death to America rallies so many middle eastern countries seem to hold on a daily basis. I think that's called justifiable paranoia.

HOW DARE YOU! THE ONLY REASON WE ARABS PUT DEATH RALLIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST IS BECAUSE OF AMERICAN SCREWUPS!!!!!!!!! IF YOU WANT KNOW MORE RALLIES GET ALL YOUR INFLUENCE OUT AND STOP WASTING MONEY THAT CAN BE USED TO HELP THE DEFICIT!!!!!!!!!!!

a dictatorship is hardly ever, if ever a single person.
a dictator could never stay in power without support.
that's why i sometimes use "dictatorship system"
when referring to them sometimes.
Not much of a dictatorship with more than a couple of people in command, to be quite honest. I don't like the US much, but I'm not going to call it a dictatorship any time soon.

Not much of a dictatorship with more than a couple of people in command, to be quite honest. I don't like the US much, but I'm not going to call it a dictatorship any time soon.

A kleptocracy is closer I think. Or a plutocracy.

A kleptocracy is closer I think. Or a plutocracy.
"Like most other governments, but claiming the moral high ground, which is really what pisses me off" is how I'd personally describe it.

Thats an average of 5.4 base per country, but odds most of them are in trouble spots like Tawian, South Korea, Isreal ect. But most likely thats including embasies, bases in afganastan and Iraq(not supporting the Iraq War), but from the Liberal extremist bull you've been spitting, probably half are in the US itself.


actually,
none of them are embassies.

Chalmers Johnson in his "Sorrows of Empire"
is my source.
He wasn't against the Vietnam war at the time,
but as he gathered more information over the years, he learned

What's absurd, dearest tape worm, is that Mr. Ahmadinejad styles himself as an academic, as a learned individual and an expert on certain matters. He attempts to couch his "holocaust denial" in the terms and concepts of an academic inquiry, as is evidenced in this article from the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel (http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,418660,00.html)/

SPIEGEL: Are you still saying that the Holocaust is just "a myth?"

Ahmadinejad: I will only accept something as truth if I am actually convinced of it.

SPIEGEL: Even though no Western scholars harbor any doubt about the Holocaust?

Ahmadinejad: But there are two opinions on this in Europe. One group of scholars or persons, most of them politically motivated, say the Holocaust occurred. Then there is the group of scholars who represent the opposite position and have therefore been imprisoned for the most part. Hence, an impartial group has to come together to investigate and to render an opinion on this very important subject, because the clarification of this issue will contribute to the solution of global problems. Under the pretext of the Holocaust, a very strong polarization has taken place in the world and fronts have been formed. It would therefore be very good if an international and impartial group looked into the matter in order to clarify it once and for all. Normally, governments promote and support the work of researchers on historical events and do not put them in prison.

You do realize the people he's extolling as impartial are sick freaks like David Duke? Say that with a straight face.

Furthermore, as far as unequivocal statements go, this is about as good as you'll get out of a waffling politician from any country:

"They have fabricated a legend under the name 'Massacre of the Jews', and they hold it higher than God himself, religion itself and the prophets themselves...(The West) deals very severely with those who deny this myth but does not do anything to those who deny God, religion, and the prophets."

He clearly and explicitly states that he believes the holocaust is a myth fabricated by the west, and that it has become so dominant to supplant the traditional role of religion.

Furthermore, the article you posted is full of hysterics and polemics, casually tossing about phrases such as "fascism" and "imperialism". Those are serious words to be playing with, and you have to bring your A game to back them up, which your author did not do. If anything, he just comes across as an apologist for a petty spokesman for an oligarchical state in the ass-end of the world, with a weak understanding of the regional implications of a nuclear-armed Iran.

Most dangerous of these challenges is the radically increased likelihood of a regional nuclear arms race. Once Iran goes nuclear, the pressure on Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria (with a massive expansion of the Israeli nuclear force to boot) to do so radically increases, likely escalating into a full-scale regional arms race, creating heightened tensions and regional instability quite more dramatic than anything we've seen before, even including the American invasion of Iraq. Putting this important link in the world's oil supply in such jeopardy is not good for anyone.

Now, criticizing Ahmadinejad is not tantamount to supporting a war with Iran, far from it. Even surgical strikes against Iranian targets would be an awful idea, because the regional blowback would likely kill thousands. It's just that neither you nor your author needs to be so alarmist about the potential for what might happen in Iran. Bush has neither the political clout, or the will to make a move. Making military action against Iran even more unlikely is the absolute havoc he would wreak with his own party's chances for any success in 2008 if he made a move.

The rumors of a war with Iran have been flying since 2003, with some people even providing specific dates (I remember there was this dude, who, for three years predicted that we'd move on Iran in late June, and someone brought him up on this forum for three years in a row: It never happened). Or perhaps we might want to reference Sy Hersh, who made the, as yet, unfulfilled claim that the US was scouting bombing sites in Iran two years ago, and that we were ready for war a year and a half ago. War with Iran is the magical leftist bogeyman, it's that ominous threat out there that's absolutely terrifying, but is entirely unreal. Iran ought to feel safe and sound within its borders, no one is going to touch them.

So, let's cut this alarmist "the sky is falling" crap, and get off the whako-wagon. Ahmadinejad is a bad dude, whose government does bad things. Don't play the role of apologist for him, rather talk about how important it is for us to support non-violent pro-democracy movements in Iran, and how liberalization (from within) in the middle east would be so very delightful. Don't go about fellating these people, because they don't deserve it.

actually,
none of them are embassies.

Chalmers Johnson in his "Sorrows of Empire"
is my source.
He wasn't against the Vietnam war at the time,
but as he gathered more information over the years, he learned

Johnson is damn fast and loose with his discussion of the concept of Empire, so much so as to make it academically useless. Rather, he has utilized this emotionally loaded phrase to benefit his own political beliefs and causes.

Furthermore, his understanding of the purposes of these bases is lacking. Whereas he manifestly sees them as imperial outposts, their actual purposes usually include training and advising for local militaries and police forces, treaty obligations or security guarantees.

yeah.think he could dismantle those over 700 known/admitted military bases in over 130 different countries that help enforce this stuff
and not risk something?

Really? The DoD acknowledges 700 overseas bases - including family housing facilties, scout camps and golf courses and half of which lie in Germany - in only 36 countries... perhaps you could furnish us with this list of 130 countries?

"They have fabricated a legend under the name 'Massacre of the Jews', and they hold it higher than God himself, religion itself and the prophets themselves...(The West) deals very severely with those who deny this myth but does not do anything to those who deny God, religion, and the prophets."
Honestly? I can't say I disagree with the point made there.

HOW DARE YOU! THE ONLY REASON WE ARABS PUT DEATH RALLIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST IS BECAUSE OF AMERICAN SCREWUPS!!!!!!!!! IF YOU WANT KNOW MORE RALLIES GET ALL YOUR INFLUENCE OUT AND STOP WASTING MONEY THAT CAN BE USED TO HELP THE DEFICIT!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh brother. Rogue...settle down. There is no need for such anger. We do not like half the governments in the Middle East but we do not go around chanting death to [insert nation here].

Honestly? I can't say I disagree with the point made there.

coming from you I'm not shocked.

coming from you I'm not shocked.

I'm not shocked either.

I'm not shocked either.

What else can you expect form the deep south?

I wouldn't be surprised if he secretly dons white sheets at night. He just makes subtle comments so he doesn't get grouped with UB and AP.

But Pantless is right. If you say "I don't believe in god", no one cares. If you said "I don't believe in the holocaust", you have people like IDF yelling "RACIST".

Which ironically demonstrates the point the original quote was making quite well.

How long before the first linking of Iran with 9-11? Or has that already happened? How long before democracy and freedom bombs begin to fall upon the heads of the Iranian people? All the charges of anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial, along with other disinformation, are of course designed to culminate in this new crime against humanity.

No need to link Iran with 9-11, they simply link it to the failure in Iraq. I think it is a bloody shame how the US administration is attempting to tie their incompetence to eledged Iranian actions...

But Pantless is right. If you say "I don't believe in god", no one cares. If you said "I don't believe in the holocaust", you have people like IDF yelling "RACIST".

Which ironically demonstrates the point the original quote was making quite well.

Um...yea because it is well documented that the Holocaust occured and that it was as bad as everyone says it is. Those that deny it, deny history.

But Pantless is right. If you say "I don't believe in god", no one cares. If you said "I don't believe in the holocaust", you have people like IDF yelling "RACIST".

Which ironically demonstrates the point the original quote was making quite well.
Ermm...

"I don't believe in God" = fair enough, not provable either way, nor has it been, and it doesn't damage anyone

"I don't believe in the holocaust" = going back on proven, well-documented history, with contemporary records thereof, and discarding the deaths of millions of people as lies. Tasteful, eh?

But Pantless is right. If you say "I don't believe in god", no one cares. If you said "I don't believe in the holocaust", you have people like IDF yelling "RACIST".

Well, people do care if you say you don't believe in God. They're called fundamentalists. But generally, saying you don't believe in God is A-Okay because it is backed up by evidence. The holocaust is also backed up by evidence, and what makes it even more offensive is because there is no legitimate reason to deny it. It was also much more traumatic for millions of people than an atheist telling someone they don't believe in God, that's why debating the holocaust's existence is more offensive than debating God's existence.

Oh brother. Rogue...settle down. There is no need for such anger. We do not like half the governments in the Middle East but we do not go around chanting death to [insert nation here].

look im just pissed, U Think i like half of them?!?! here are the ones who are actually democratic by united states standards:
lebanon
jordan
turkey
iran
yemen
oman
BUT HERES THE ONES THEY SUPPORT CUS OF OIL:
saudi arabia
kuwait
egypt
qatar
UAE
bahrain
all of which are undemocratic dictatorships and monarchies

look im just pissed, U Think i like half of them?!?! here are the ones who are actually democratic by united states standards:
lebanon
jordan
turkey
iran
yemen
oman

Um...Iran is not democratic. Not even by US standards.

BUT HERES THE ONES THEY SUPPORT CUS OF OIL:
saudi arabia
kuwait
egypt
qatar
UAE
bahrain
all of which are undemocratic dictatorships and monarchies

Actually...Kuwait is more democratic than you think. In reality...Egypt is also democratic as well.

Um...Iran is not democratic. Not even by US standards.



Actually...Kuwait is more democratic than you think. In reality...Egypt is also democratic as well.


And the others?

But Pantless is right. If you say "I don't believe in god", no one cares. If you said "I don't believe in the holocaust", you have people like IDF yelling "RACIST".

Which ironically demonstrates the point the original quote was making quite well.

Denying the Holocaust makes you both a moron and an anti-semite. It is historical fact backed up by millions of documents and witnesses. Anyone who denies it should be locked up in a mental institution.

look im just pissed, U Think i like half of them?!?! here are the ones who are actually democratic by united states standards:
lebanon
jordan
turkey
iran
yemen
oman
BUT HERES THE ONES THEY SUPPORT CUS OF OIL:
saudi arabia
kuwait
egypt
qatar
UAE
bahrain
all of which are undemocratic dictatorships and monarchies

That's a good one. Of six nations you seem to think of as 'democratic by united states standards', two are ruled by authoritarian monarchs, one requires the approval of a religious council and the another is ruled by a President who has been in power for so long that he has completely stifled all credible opposition. In what way are these democracies?

Denying the Holocaust makes you both a moron and an anti-semite.I never met anyone who denied the Holocausts.
Have you?

look im just pissed, U Think i like half of them?!?! here are the ones who are actually democratic by united states standards:
lebanon
jordan
turkey
iran
yemen
oman

BUT HERES THE ONES THEY SUPPORT CUS OF OIL:
saudi arabia
kuwait
egypt
qatar
UAE
bahrain
all of which are undemocratic dictatorships and monarchies

Um...Iran is not democratic. Not even by US standards.metric or imperial standards? :D
.
Actually...Kuwait is more democratic than you think. In reality...Egypt is also democratic as well.LOL, Kuwait and Egypt are Democracies? Let me guess.. CNN/FOX/AP? or is that from the The CIA World Factbook
:D :D :D :D

Eh?

Isn't calling it a myth basically a denial?

They have created a myth today that they call the massacre of Jews and they consider it a principle above God, religions and the prophets.

However, if someone were to deny the myth of the Jews' massacre, all the Zionist mouthpieces and the governments subservient to the Zionists tear their larynxes and scream against the person as much as they can.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4527142.stm

Eh?

Isn't calling it a myth basically a denial?





http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4527142.stm

yep.

Eh?

Isn't calling it a myth basically a denial?





http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4527142.stm

HA .. i was about to post the same one... gj beating me to it ;']

pffftt.. Grammar Nazies :rolleyes:


Even if "Nazi" wasn't an abbreviation (eg it was a word like "Roti") it would be pluralized without the "e".
"-ies" in plurals is only used where the root word ends in "y"

Just looking out for my union. ;)

--------------

Holocaust denial is just plain dumb, but it shouldn't be a crime. In fact, it makes more sense to ban the truth than to ban untruths. Laws against holocaust denial, denying visas or speaking platforms to the likes of Irving are the very real basis of Aheminijads ludicrous assertion that "holocaust dissidents" are jailed in the West.

Holocaust deniers who do that to make Nazis smell of roses are hopelessly wrong. But Aheminijad obviously has political reasons, since the impetus for the creation of Israel was the Holocaust. He seeks to deligitimize the establishment of Israel, because he is speaking to people who hate Israel.

When the domestic perception of a country's importance, and its real stature on the world stage are widely seperated, of course the leaders will dish up empty rhetoric for domestic consumption. We are fools to take them at face value and treat them like the elected leaders of powerful countries, who have the luxury of actually being able to do what they say they want to do.

I'd much rather have a big loud rent-a-crowd screaming abuse at my country and burning its flag, than to have them actually killing our citizens or even putting economic sanctions on it. When you haven't got power, it helps to blow off some steam ... so just laugh at their Nike shirts and funny spelling.

No size of nuclear arsenal would make nuking Israel a good idea for Iran.

casually tossing about phrases such as "fascism" and "imperialism". Those are serious words to be playing with,

Chalmers Johnson mostly focuses on the military bases.
He calls them an "empire of bases".

But empire, as the US is,
is more than just bludgeoning armies.

The forcing of the legal form that is the corporation onto other people's countries, as the US has done for the past century, whether there was a Soviet presence or not, whether it dragged the Soviet Union into a conflict or caused a country to seek assistance from the SU,
corporations have historically been a tool of imperialism.
Supporters of these legal constructs have only managed to claim an almost synonymous meaning with that of a regular business over the last century or so. But they are not the same as a regular business. And are not even primarily "business" either anyway.



It is funny how when imperialism by the US & European countries supposedly ended the same resources continued to flow out of the "former" colonies.
Because there is no longer a European or US colonial magistrate in charge of the country, but instead have locals, maybe even somehow elected, then imperialism/colonialism was supposedly ended.
This is sort of a politically correct version of empire. Someone back home (US or Europe) seeing native Namibians in charge of Namibia would undoubtedly think at first glance that colonialism does no longer exist.
But only became far more subtle since then.


Witness how you nonchalantly call other people and their lands "the ass-end of the world". This type of thinking shows how easy it is to garner support for some sort of aggression against other countries. You may not support this aggression, but this helps make it happen. They are "uncivilized". Just as the peoples of the First Nations of the Americas once were called. And it's actually the same thing. An unbroken chain of domination. Because traditional expansion was no longer politically correct.


And this stuff is done with more than the IMF & World Bank.
A lot of this stuff came out in the 70s with the congressional hearings like the Church & Pike Commissions. But they only managed to get so much into the public domain, where it naturally belongs. Instead they started doing it out in the open with the "National Endowment for Democracy (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Endowment_For_Democracy)" along with the International Republican Institute (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Republican_Institute) and the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs have played funny with other people's elections. Venezuela comes to mind in recent years. The Chavez Code: Cracking US Intervention in Venezuela (http://www.amazon.com/Chavez-Code-Cracking-Intervention-Venezuela/dp/1566566479/ref=sr_1_1/105-1158435-7984423?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1192495404&sr=1-1) tracks the money and declassified documents on US intervention in Venezuela's democracy.

The Venezuela example shows that this sort of stuff is not in the past (oh, and the US coup on Haiti (http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/28/1456242) as well) but if this stuff was in the past...,
why were not all those people involved that Church & co were able to bring to light behind bars? Because prisons are obsolete (http://www.sevenstories.com/Book/index.cfm?GCOI=58322100778090) that's why. Definitely non-violent drug offenders should not be behind bars. That has helped increase those behind bars in the US from the 70s to now from about 200k to over 2 million. Astronomical.


Why does the US go into places like Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet Union invades to set the "Afghan trap (http://www.counterpunch.org/brzezinski.html)"?

I doubt women who got acid thrown into their faces (http://www.rawa.org/) for not wearing a veil by Reagan's Afghan buddy would call that benevolent.


I'm not going to deny that Iran is some sort of "oligarchical state"
The Iranian author of "Iran: A People Interrupted (http://www.asiastore.org/irpein.html)" neither falls for the "theocracy or empire" argument.
But I'm not going to live under the delusion that the US is some sort of egalitarian society
and not an "oligarchic state" itself.

Originally Posted by DER SPIEGEL

Ahmadinejad:Then there is the group of scholars who represent the opposite position and have therefore been imprisoned for the most part.

Normally, governments promote and support the work of researchers on historical events and do not put them in prison.


While I personally wouldn't exactly call any people doing "research" on "the non-existence" of the nazi induced holocaust against Jews, Slavs, Roma, Homosexuals, etc... the above extractions of Mr A's quote has a point.

Isn't it illegal to do certain free speech things in some European countries?



If you check the first link I posted,
you can see the conference
...including six members of Jews United Against Zionism, at least two of whom were rabbis. One was Ahron Cohen, from London, who declared: "There is no doubt whatsoever, that during World War 2 there developed a terrible and catastrophic policy and action of genocide perpetrated by Nazi Germany against the Jewish People." He also said that "the Zionists make a great issue of the Holocaust in order to further their illegitimate philosophy and aims," indicating as well that the figure of six million Jewish victims is debatable. The other rabbi was Moshe David Weiss, who told the delegates: "We don't want to deny the killing of Jews in World War II, but Zionists have given much higher figures for how many people were killed. They have used the Holocaust as a device to justify their oppression." His group rejects the creation of Israel on the grounds that it violates Jewish religious law in that a Jewish state can't exist until the return of the Messiah .[13]
[13] nkusa.org/activities/Speeches/2006Iran-ACohen.cfm; Telegraph.co.uk, article by Alex Spillius, December 13, 2006; Associated Press, December 12, 2006


To be sure, I am no expert on middle-eastern affairs,
but I do know that not all Jews are Zionists,
and not all Jews living in Israel are Zionists.
I do not exactly know what is the definition of "Zionism",
but I do know not all Jews are, nor are all Jews living in Israel Zionists.
So I suspect this is where a lot of confusion comes in.

Denying the Holocaust makes you both a moron and an anti-semite. It is historical fact backed up by millions of documents and witnesses. Anyone who denies it should be locked up in a mental institution.


A moron maybe, but I don't know about an anti-semite.
Since the holocaust by the nazis was also against Slavic peoples, Homosexuals, Roma, the handicapped, etc...

Do they lock up people who think Iraq had something to do with some bombings in the US? They are delusional too, but people believe it and I don't think they should be locked up.

While I personally wouldn't exactly call any people doing "research" on "the non-existence" of the nazi induced holocaust against Jews, Slavs, Roma, Homosexuals, etc... the above extractions of Mr A's quote has a point.

You would said that.

Isn't it illegal to do certain free speech things in some European countries?

For starters, you cannot deny the holocaust.

If you check the first link I posted,
you can see the conference

The conference been debated on these boards too.

To be sure, I am no expert on middle-eastern affairs,

That's obvious.

but I do know that not all Jews are Zionists,

True

and not all Jews living in Israel are Zionists.

True

I do not exactly know what is the definition of "Zionism",

Zionism: Wanting a jewish state in the promise land.

but I do know not all Jews are, nor are all Jews living in Israel Zionists.
So I suspect this is where a lot of confusion comes in.

Maybe but then...

A moron maybe, but I don't know about an anti-semite.

I would not go as far as being called an anti-semite but it does make one very very moronic and deluded with a disregard of historical facts.

Since the holocaust by the nazis was also against Slavic peoples, Homosexuals, Roma, the handicapped, etc...

But yet...more jews were killed than any of these groups.

Do they lock up people who think Iraq had something to do with some bombings in the US?

Um...no.

They are delusional too, but people believe it and I don't think they should be locked up.

That's because they're not.

You would said that.

Maybe but then...


One time I had heard something like Zionism was or included expanding the state of Israel beyond into the illegally occupied territories; beyond the 1967? borders.
Taking over the land where other people live is wrong.
It's usually called imperialism.
No reason to make any special exceptions to the definition.


I don't get your first statement

One time I had heard something like Zionism was or included expanding the state of Israel beyond into the illegally occupied territories; beyond the 1967? borders.
Taking over the land where other people live is wrong.
It's usually called imperialism.
No reason to make any special exceptions to the definition.



Dictionaries are your friend. the definition you were fed is one that is incorrect and likely fed to you by a moron with an agenda or complete disregard for a dictionary.

Zionism is purely wanting the Jewish state of Israel to exist. Nothing more, nothing less.

Dictionaries are your friend. the definition you were fed is one that is incorrect and likely fed to you by a moron with an agenda or complete disregard for a dictionary.

Zionism is purely wanting the Jewish state of Israel to exist. Nothing more, nothing less.

You can send your statement to this person as well:

Corneliu 2
Gaming Master
Quote:
I do not exactly know what is the definition of "Zionism",
Zionism: Wanting a jewish state in the promise land.



because the phrase "the promise(d) land" could alter what is meant very much so. What would "the promise(d) land" mean? Eight times larger than the current picture of the state of Israel on the most widespread maps used in the US? If so, that would be pro-expansion on top of other people.

Do some people think the state of Israel IS pre-1967 borders AND territories occupied post 1967? And that not including the occupied territories is somehow "not wanting the state of Israel to exist"?

*snip*

The forcing of the legal form that is the corporation onto other people's countries, as the US has done for the past century, whether there was a Soviet presence or not, whether it dragged the Soviet Union into a conflict or caused a country to seek assistance from the SU,

<grammar nazi>
"Soviet Union" is a Western construction, a shortening of "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics." If you can't be bother typing out "Soviet Union", go with "USSR."

Respect for fallen comrades, y'know.
</grammar nazi>

Also, I think you're wrong. The US military is a handy tool for the corporations, but they'd do fine without it ... making "war for oil" particularly repugnant, it's like two big brawlers sharing a cell with a runty child-molestor, they're afraid of each other but they can agree to do the little guy from both ends.

corporations have historically been a tool of imperialism.

Or vice versa. Honourable East India Company, Dutch East Indies Company ...

<grammar nazi>
"Soviet Union" is a Western construction, a shortening of "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics." If you can't be bother typing out "Soviet Union", go with "USSR."

Respect for fallen comrades, y'know.
</grammar nazi>

Also, I think you're wrong. The US military is a handy tool for the corporations, but they'd do fine without it ... making "war for oil" particularly repugnant, it's like two big brawlers sharing a cell with a runty child-molestor, they're afraid of each other but they can agree to do the little guy from both ends.


Or vice versa. Honourable East India Company, Dutch East Indies Company ...


wealth extraction in the name of the king.
corporations were chartered in the kings name, with his blessing.
but, yeah. i get your point.

i like SU because it kind of shows the mirror imagery it was of the US.
they were basically the same. the two last remaining empires
competing for the world's resources.

John Perkins, author of "Confessions of an Economic Hitman (http://www.economichitman.com/confessions/confessions.htm)" puts things in 3 categories, 1) at the IMF, World Bank, etc..., 2) the Jackals, i.e. the cia, 3) finally, when all else fails, the brute force of the military

Oh brother. Rogue...settle down. There is no need for such anger. We do not like half the governments in the Middle East but we do not go around chanting death to [insert nation here].

We don't hate them. We just have lucrative business agreements with them.

Eh?

Isn't abortion basically murder?just what is your definition of the word "basically"Eh?

Isn't calling it a myth basically a denial?

myth

Main Entry: myth Listen to the pronunciation of myth
Pronunciation: \ˈmith\
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek mythos
Date:1830

A usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon
b: parable, allegory2 a: a popular belief or tradition that has grown up around something or someone; especially : one embodying the ideals and institutions of a society or segment of society <seduced by the American myth of individualism — Orde Coombs> b: an unfounded or false notion3: a person or thing having only an imaginary or unverifiable existence4: the whole body of mythshttp://www.m-w.com/dictionary/myth

While I personally wouldn't exactly call any people doing "research" on "the non-existence" of the nazi induced holocaust against Jews, Slavs, Roma, Homosexuals, etc... the above extractions of Mr A's quote has a point.

You seem to miss the fact that the people whom Mister Ahmadinejad describes as impartial are people like David Duke, whilst the people who he describes as politically motivated are EVERYONE ELSE IN THE FUCKING WORLD.

Isn't it illegal to do certain free speech things in some European countries?
It's illegal to incite hate speech, a set of laws I disagree with, but it's absolutely absurd, irrational, nay, retarded and ludicrous to claim that there is debate as to the actuality of the holocaust.

I mean, for Chrissakes, the people who carried this out were Germans: They recorded the entire event, practically as if it were a minute-by-minute event. They tatooed folks for a reason: To keep track of them for accounting purposes. Germans love organized records, hell, myy mixed-Germanic ancestors have kept impeccable journals for the past 320 years, a tradition that continues to this very day! Germans keep records more compulsively than any other group of people.




To be sure, I am no expert on middle-eastern affairs,
but I do know that not all Jews are Zionists,
and not all Jews living in Israel are Zionists.
I do not exactly know what is the definition of "Zionism",
but I do know not all Jews are, nor are all Jews living in Israel Zionists.
So I suspect this is where a lot of confusion comes in.

Read your godforsaken links:


...but Zionists have given much higher figures for how many people were killed...

That, schatzlein, is denial. There are two fundamental errors wrong with this statement: First, there is the problem of saying the holocaust was an event of not quite the severity that is believed by everyone, and second, that the only people who support the true account are zionists. Abject falsehood.

We don't want to deny the killing of Jews in World War II, but Zionists have given much higher figures for how many people were killed.
...
the figure of six million Jewish victims is debatable.

That, schatzlein, is denial.No it is not.

The figures are debatable..
In this very forum. some of the the figures that been stated:
**000000
8000000
20000000
11000000
6000000
**0000

and that is total figures(Gypsies/Gays/slaves/Jews/romo/etc)
To guess their religion % .. IS just a guess. Unless your source is Hollywood.

Heck even Zionists do not agree between themselves.

just what is your definition of the word "basically"


So you are saying no?

So you are saying no?I am saying maybe, maybe not.

No it is not.

The figures are debatable..
In this very forum. some of the the figures that been stated:
**000000
8000000
20000000
11000000
6000000
**0000

and that is total figures(Gypsies/Gays/slaves/Jews/romo/etc)
To guess their religion % .. IS just a guess. Unless your source is Hollywood.

Heck even Zionists do not agree between themselves.

Whether or not people are using incorrect figures is fine to debate all you like, but denying the generally accepted account of the Holocaust is, well, denying it, so don't say it isn't. Say it is a "justified" denial if you must, but don't say it isn't.

Whether or not people are using incorrect figures is fine to debate all you like, but denying the generally accepted account of the Holocaust is, well, denying it, so don't say it isn't. Say it is a "justified" denial if you must, but don't say it isn't.

It's OD. He's a resident anti-semite so to expect him to do that is wishing for the cubs to win the world series.

It's OD. He's a resident anti-semite so to expect him to do that is wishing for the cubs to win the world series.

Hey, how come they let you out of jail? You're a cubs denier!

I think it's stupid and counterproductive to not let OC2 make a simple observation without yelling "anti-semite!"

Sheesh, I don't mind that Jews are chronic whingers. It's part of their miserable, negative religious culture. But when everyone else is co-opted into whinging on their behalf, I call international Jewish conspiracy.

Where I disagree with Hitler is that the international Jewish conspiracy is not aimed at economic domination of the globe ... nope, they just want us all to be as miserable as them.

Also, we don't need to kill them nowadays. Meds should do the trick ...
(/grotesque irony)

You seem to miss the fact that the people whom Mister Ahmadinejad describes as impartial are people like David Duke, whilst the people who he describes as politically motivated are EVERYONE ELSE IN THE FUCKING WORLD.

The only reason I really paid any attention to it was because of those who attended the conference.

the conference
Quote:
...including six members of Jews United Against Zionism, at least two of whom were rabbis. One was Ahron Cohen, from London, who declared: "There is no doubt whatsoever, that during World War 2 there developed a terrible and catastrophic policy and action of genocide perpetrated by Nazi Germany against the Jewish People." He also said that "the Zionists make a great issue of the Holocaust in order to further their illegitimate philosophy and aims," indicating as well that the figure of six million Jewish victims is debatable. The other rabbi was Moshe David Weiss, who told the delegates: "We don't want to deny the killing of Jews in World War II, but Zionists have given much higher figures for how many people were killed. They have used the Holocaust as a device to justify their oppression." His group rejects the creation of Israel on the grounds that it violates Jewish religious law in that a Jewish state can't exist until the return of the Messiah .[13]
[13] nkusa.org/activities/Speeches/2006Iran-ACohen.cfm; Telegraph.co.uk, article by Alex Spillius, December 13, 2006; Associated Press, December 12, 2006



David Duke, the "modern" face of the kkk is obviously a wank.
And it is sad he ran for president. Maybe even sadder that some political party had him speak at their convention. Worse, that just about everything he ran on was adopted by that same party.

But I highly doubt those rabbis above are "our in-group is the bestest" shmucks.

I mean, seriously, any group that claims to better than the rest, has serious delusional problems and is some sort of supremacists...simply delusional

Um...Iran is not democratic. Not even by US standards.
UH USA two parties make it to goverment
Iran hardliners and reformists: 2 groups
equal number of parties

Actually...Kuwait is more democratic than you think. In reality...Egypt is also democratic as well.

Egypt!??!?!
its a dicatorship
kuwait, i know a prince from kuwait they run the fucking country like a moarchy they dont need any permisson from the people

That's a good one. Of six nations you seem to think of as 'democratic by united states standards', two are ruled by authoritarian monarchs, one requires the approval of a religious council and the another is ruled by a President who has been in power for so long that he has completely stifled all credible opposition. In what way are these democracies?

both monarchs are fair with their people who like them, dont you need lobbying groups to make money to even run the campaign, and what do you call the bush presidency, as far as im concered they are more democartic

For starters, you cannot deny the holocaust.



well you could but that would be stupid
also everyone here says it existed, was downplayed or a myth has anyone thought about maybe it was more than 6 million

Egypt!??!?!
its a dicatorship
kuwait, i know a prince from kuwait they run the fucking country like a moarchy they dont need any permisson from the people

You a know a prince? You do realize that there are many princes of Kuwait. That's rich. Why should I believe that you know a Prince of Kuwait?

As for Egypt, Presidentially, I'll grant you that. However, they do have several political parties in their parliment. As to the Presidency however, remember those reforms? Granted, I'm highly skeptical of it but still...it is a start. Now all they got to do is stop beating up those in opposition and pass the amendment limiting the presidential term...

Where I disagree with Hitler is that the international Jewish conspiracy is not aimed at economic domination of the globe ... nope, they just want us all to be as miserable as them.

(/grotesque irony)

uh about the hitler theory of jewish economic domination, i know he was wrong and everything, but i recall something i read once about the jewish nation at arrmagedeon, conquering the entire world

You a know a prince? You do realize that there are many princes of Kuwait. That's rich. Why should I believe that you know a Prince of Kuwait?

As for Egypt, Presidentially, I'll grant you that. However, they do have several political parties in their parliment. As to the Presidency however, remember those reforms? Granted, I'm highly skeptical of it but still...it is a start. Now all they got to do is stop beating up those in opposition and pass the amendment limiting the presidential term...

i go to a boarding school that the king of jordan set up and he goes there and theres also a nephew of the ruler of bahrain, and hes funnier than andras prime ranting
and do you really think that the president is goona give up power in his family think again he rather do this for the rest of his life:headbang:

uh about the hitler theory of jewish economic domination, i know he was wrong and everything, but i recall something i read once about the jewish nation at arrmagedeon, conquering the entire world

Which actually does not literally happen.

i go to a boarding school that the king of jordan set up and he goes there and theres also a nephew of the ruler of bahrain, and hes funnier than andras prime ranting
and do you really think that the president is goona give up power in his family think again he rather do this for the rest of his life:headbang:

Am I correct to assume you live in Jordan?

As for Egypt, Presidentially, I'll grant you that. However, they do have several political parties in their parliment. As to the Presidency however, remember those reforms? Granted, I'm highly skeptical of it but still...it is a start. Now all they got to do is stop beating up those in opposition and pass the amendment limiting the presidential term...

You know that Gamal will become the new president, don't you?

reforms :rolleyes:

You know that Gamal will become the new president, don't you?

Yep.

reforms :rolleyes:

Every nation has to start somewhere. I am not expecting a US type democracy.

Yep.

Every nation has to start somewhere. I am not expecting a US type democracy.

:D
True, but Egypt still has a very long way to go. People are still not willing to speak of politics. Opposition leadership has been imprisoned and real opposition parties are simply disallowed. Still, there is soem improvement

:D
True, but Egypt still has a very long way to go. People are still not willing to speak of politics. Opposition leadership has been imprisoned and real opposition parties are simply disallowed. Still, there is soem improvement

Yep. There have been improvements and that was what I was focusing on.

Which actually does not literally happen.

oh?

Am I correct to assume you live in Jordan?

yes im just a resident, im lebanese and i'm proudly from balbaak(where hizbaullah started)

oh?

Yep. Israel does not actually conquer anything during armageddon. Actually...there really will not be a battle if my interpretation of events is correct.

yes im just a resident, im lebanese and i'm proudly from balbaak(where hizbaullah started)

a'ridu an 'adhhaba li-llubnani in sha’a llah :p

Yep. Israel does not actually conquer anything during armageddon. Actually...there really will not be a battle if my interpretation of events is correct.

SO let me get this straight isreal will not conquer anything and there wont even be a battle if you're right?
WE'RE SCREWED!!!!!!!!

a'ridu an 'adhhaba li-llubnani in sha’a llah :p

you want to go to lebanon? you arab? lebansese
allah ho ackbar la illah ila lah wa mohmad rasoolih

both monarchs are fair with their people who like them, dont you need lobbying groups to make money to even run the campaign, and what do you call the bush presidency, as far as im concered they are more democartic

Last I heard, Bush doesn't throw you in prison for insulting him or his family. The ability to criticise your leaders is one of the most important parts of democracy, and the lack of such rights in Jordan means that democracy does not exist there - it isn't even a bad attempt at democracy like neighbouring Lebanon, its non-existant. Don't get me wrong, King Abdullah is one of the better leaders in the Middle East, and one of the best non-democratic leaders in the world, but the idea that Jordan is democratic, or more democratic than America, is untrue.

Last I heard, Bush doesn't throw you in prison for insulting him or his family. The ability to criticise your leaders is one of the most important parts of democracy, and the lack of such rights in Jordan means that democracy does not exist there - it isn't even a bad attempt at democracy like neighbouring Lebanon, its non-existant. Don't get me wrong, King Abdullah is one of the better leaders in the Middle East, and one of the best non-democratic leaders in the world, but the idea that Jordan is democratic, or more democratic than America, is untrue.

since im too tired to speak logic im simply going to rant bush lover!!!!!!!!
but seroiusly King Abdullah is way better than Bush
and what would you expect in lebanon theres 18 different sects and each has there own agenda, not to mention the political groups and outside pressure, i mean come on why do you think we killed each other for 25 years*lights candle and says prayer for everyone who died* and its democratic to stop votes coming in?
my god im becoming andras prime some one save me *;):mp5:*

since im too tired to speak logic im simply going to rant bush lover!!!!!!!!
but seroiusly King Abdullah is way better than Bush

I'm not even American; but if I could vote in America I would certainly not vote for Bush. However, you seem to think that the quality of American leadership is in some way related to the level of democracy in America. Its not; wether the King of Jordan is a better or worse than Bush has no bearing on the fact that America is a democracy and Jordan is not. Personally, I consider an authoritarian to be just as bad as incompetence.

and what would you expect in lebanon theres 18 different sects and each has there own agenda, not to mention the political groups and outside pressure, i mean come on why do you think we killed each other for 25 years*lights candle and says prayer for everyone who died* and its democratic to stop votes coming in?
my god im becoming andras prime some one save me *;):mp5:*

Which is why I said Lebanon is a bad democracy, rather than a successful democracy - largely down to the inability to exert influence over the country and heavy anti-democratic influence from its neighbours. However, the government of Lebanon, for all its faults, is not authoritarian.

since im too tired to speak logic im simply going to rant bush lover!!!!!!!!

Oh Brother :rolleyes: This is getting old.

but seroiusly King Abdullah is way better than Bush

At least Bush was elected and will step down in 2009. At least Bush has to answer to Congress. Who does the King answer to? No one.

and what would you expect in lebanon theres 18 different sects and each has there own agenda, not to mention the political groups and outside pressure, i mean come on why do you think we killed each other for 25 years*lights candle and says prayer for everyone who died* and its democratic to stop votes coming in?

So Lebanon stopped the democratic process? And here I thought it was King Assad of Syria (may he burn in hell) stopped the Civil War and basiclly controled the country and still does.

my god im becoming andras prime some one save me *;):mp5:*

Yes you are. Stop it or I have to place you on ignore.

I'm not even American; but if I could vote in America I would certainly not vote for Bush. However, you seem to think that the quality of American leadership is in some way related to the level of democracy in America. Its not; wether the King of Jordan is a better or worse than Bush has no bearing on the fact that America is a democracy and Jordan is not. Personally, I consider an authoritarian to be just as bad as incompetence.



Which is why I said Lebanon is a bad democracy, rather than a successful democracy - largely down to the inability to exert influence over the country and heavy anti-democratic influence from its neighbours. However, the government of Lebanon, for all its faults, is not authoritarian.

but what if your actually a good authoritarian leader and, what you said was that lebanon is non existant as a democracy, and as i have said can you blame them, also if democracy is electing people like bush, and blair, who would want it

Which is why I said Lebanon is a bad democracy, rather than a successful democracy - largely down to the inability to exert influence over the country and heavy anti-democratic influence from its neighbours. However, the government of Lebanon, for all its faults, is not authoritarian.

you actually said that lebanon is non existant as a democracy, and as i have said can you blame them, also if democracy is electing people like bush, and blair, who would want it

At least Bush was elected and will step down in 2009. At least Bush has to answer to Congress. Who does the King answer to? No one.

So Lebanon stopped the democratic process? And here I thought it was King Assad of Syria (may he burn in hell) stopped the Civil War and basically controled the country and still does.

Yes you are. Stop it or I have to place you on ignore.

uh i doubt congress would do anything since theyre all big pussies
and the king is far better than bush, he hasnt screwed up jordan has he?
i agree their assad can go to hell, and what isreal didnt do squat the entire time? lebanon by its very nature is a scaled down version of the usa(minus the ethnicities) and is easily manipulated by its neigbours, the goverment by isreal and USA, and the oppostion by syrian and iran
and relax the only reason i went on a rant was cus i was really cranky and had to scream at some one

uh i doubt congress would do anything since theyre all big pussies

Yes Congress is a big pussy. Now what is this comment referring to?

and the king is far better than bush, he hasnt screwed up jordan has he?

He stifles dissent does he?

i agree their assad can go to hell, and what isreal didnt do squat the entire time?

Was wondering when this was going to come. Let me see...PLO launching attacks into Israel from Lebanon in the '80s. Let's see....an organization attacks a soveriegn nation from another nation, what do you think Israel was going to do? Oh yes...Attack.

lebanon by its very nature is a scaled down version of the usa(minus the ethnicities) and is easily manipulated by its neigbours, the goverment by isreal and USA, and the oppostion by syrian and iran

Wait wait wait! We're manipulating Lebanon? Shit man...proof?

and relax the only reason i went on a rant was cus i was really cranky and had to scream at some one

No use screaming here. Most people will jump down your throat for doing so.

He stifles dissent does he?


How would I go about joining the Communist Party in America?

How would I go about joining the Communist Party in America?

My guess is that you go to the nearest party registration place and mark down communist.

but what if your actually a good authoritarian leader and, what you said was that lebanon is non existant as a democracy, and as i have said can you blame them, also if democracy is electing people like bush, and blair, who would want it

'Good' and 'authoritarian' are hard to reconcile. Good leaders don't imprison their own citizens for dissent. Good leaders also don't hold people indefinitely in offshore prisons, but then I never said that Bush was a good leader.

you actually said that lebanon is non existant as a democracy, and as i have said can you blame them, also if democracy is electing people like bush, and blair, who would want it

No I didn't. If you re-read my post, you'll notice that I said Lebanon is a bad democracy and Jordan is a non-existant democracy.

How would I go about joining the Communist Party in America?

Try their website. (http://www.cpusa.org/join)

Or their youth movement (http://www.yclusa.org/join), if appropriate.

My guess is that you go to the nearest party registration place and mark down communist.

Pwn'd.:)

Pwn'd.:)

I thank you :D

I thank you :D

But surely you don't HAVE to do that to join the Communist Party? Couldn't you register as an independent, then join and work for the Communist Party without having to tell any government representative about it?

They'd know anyway, of course. I'm just wondering how registering thus would oblige the USCPA to accept you as a member ...?

But surely you don't HAVE to do that to join the Communist Party? Couldn't you register as an independent, then join and work for the Communist Party without having to tell any government representative about it?

One can register as an independent. No one is stopping them from doing so. As to changing parties from an Independent (which is not even a party) to the Communist Party...that is really simple. As to telling the government....it really does not matter if they know you are a communist or not anymore. That's the beauty of this country. Of course, to get elected is a totally different ballgame.

They'd know anyway, of course. I'm just wondering how registering thus would oblige the USCPA to accept you as a member ...?

All you have to do is tell them that you want to join their party. When I registered as a Republican, I did that at the Department of Motor Vehicles when I got my PA State ID Card.

...That's the beauty of this country....

WAS. You got right through McCarthyism without the CPA being banned, though the process didn't exactly reek of liberty.

There's now a long list of proscribed organizations. Even ring up and ask to join, and it's straight to jail do not pass a magistrate.

That you aren't paranoid about Commies any more isn't exactly something to boast about.

We're as bad. Sometimes I just wish I had my own island and a fishing rod. :(

WAS. You got right through McCarthyism without the CPA being banned, though the process didn't exactly reek of liberty.

Yep.

There's now a long list of proscribed organizations. Even ring up and ask to join, and it's straight to jail do not pass a magistrate.

And what organizations would that be?

That you aren't paranoid about Commies any more isn't exactly something to boast about.

Yep.

We're as bad. Sometimes I just wish I had my own island and a fishing rod. :(

lol.

And what organizations would that be?

Er ... *mumble mumble* ... you know, the ones listed as providing material aid to terrorists. I'd really rather not use names if you don't mind.

Of course, I have a degree of trust in government and reckon they'd probably let me go again if I persuaded them I really just wanted a pamphlet or something ... but why take a punt? It's not like they can't make mistakes!



But on what we were talking about before, I don't really get why people register "as" a particular party? Does that automatically entitle them to vote for delegates to the major conventions? Or is it just a meaningless pre-poll? I do know you don't have to vote the way you're registered ...

I could google of course ...

And what organizations would that be?The teletubbies.. NOT
US govt said to target Muslim charities
03/13/2006
WASHINGTON: Two Muslim-American doctors involved in fundraising for charities that help Muslims and Palestinians have accused the US government of targeting Muslim charities after September 11.

The doctors claim that several Muslim charities have been closed down without any evidence of their involvement in any terrorist activity.

Laila al-Marayati and Basil Abdelkarim, who are on the board of a an Ohio-based charity ‘KinderAmerica’, writing in the Washigton Post on Sunday accused the US Treasury Department of “playing target practice” with American Muslim charities. They reported that Treasury agents last month seized the assets and froze operations of the charity ‘KindHearts’, acting on the “dubious” allegation that it was financing terrorism.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1595477/posts

Yes Congress is a big pussy. Now what is this comment referring to?

He stifles dissent does he?

Was wondering when this was going to come. Let me see...PLO launching attacks into Israel from Lebanon in the '80s. Let's see....an organization attacks a soveriegn nation from another nation, what do you think Israel was going to do? Oh yes...Attack.

Wait wait wait! We're manipulating Lebanon? Shit man...proof?

No use screaming here. Most people will jump down your throat for doing so.
whether they'd proscute bush

uh how about bi-national solution, isreal is the one to give up ground
who stifles dissent?
you need proof, when has the usa not manipulate a country to its needs?
relax i said it was just an anger period

'Good' and 'authoritarian' are hard to reconcile. Good leaders don't imprison their own citizens for dissent. Good leaders also don't hold people indefinitely in offshore prisons, but then I never said that Bush was a good leader.
No I didn't. If you re-read my post, you'll notice that I said Lebanon is a bad democracy and Jordan is a non-existant democracy.

thank god for that, also sorry of the jordan lebanon mixeup my english grammer isn't that good, uh doesn't the usa put people in prison for dissent?

thank god for that, also sorry of the jordan lebanon mixeup my english grammer isn't that good, uh doesn't the usa put people in prison for dissent?

Only if that dissent involves lighting things on fire, or otherwise committing an illegal act in the expression of said dissent.

Where the hell would you ever get an idea like that?

How would I go about joining the Communist Party in America?

By clicking this link (http://www.cpusa.org/join).

whether they'd proscute bush

For what hmmm? Bush has not done anything illegal.

uh how about bi-national solution, isreal is the one to give up ground
who stifles dissent?

Oh brother! Israel stifles dissent? There at war with terrorists in both Gaza and the West Bank. I can see stifling dissent there.

you need proof, when has the usa not manipulate a country to its needs?

I see you forgot what politics is all about.

relax i said it was just an anger period

Just sayin...

The teletubbies.. NOT

The free republic is not exactly a valid source.

thank god for that, also sorry of the jordan lebanon mixeup my english grammer isn't that good, uh doesn't the usa put people in prison for dissent?

Nope. Unless of course....

*reads belows*

Only if that dissent involves lighting things on fire, or otherwise committing an illegal act in the expression of said dissent.

Where the hell would you ever get an idea like that?

From the tyrants that run the middle east :D

you want to go to lebanon? you arab? lebansese
allah ho ackbar la illah ila lah wa mohmad rasoolih

Lam 'akun arabi wa lam 'akun Muslim aidhan lakinni Talibu l-luga l-arabiyya

Lazim 'adris kithir :)

Only if that dissent involves lighting things on fire, or otherwise committing an illegal act in the expression of said dissent.

Where the hell would you ever get an idea like that?
uh sadly every thing i know about america comes from people who have been there and the news, (which makes it seem like a decadent nation that has incest, murder, serial killers drugs and rampant cultists

uh sadly every thing i know about america comes from people who have been there and the news, (which makes it seem like a decadent nation that has incest, murder, serial killers drugs and rampant cultists

Oh brother. And people wonder why we do not like people overseas. :headbang:

For what hmmm? Bush has not done anything illegal.

Oh brother! Israel stifles dissent? There at war with terrorists in both Gaza and the West Bank. I can see stifling dissent there.



1.he said that congress would prosecute bush, i relied that congress are pussies
2.i was asking who he was saying stifle dissent?
3. wow your cold

1.he said that congress would prosecute bush, i relied that congress are pussies

Who is this he?

2.i was asking who he was saying stifle dissent?

Who is stifling dissent?

3. wow your cold

Actually...I'm quite comfortable :)

Lam 'akun arabi wa lam 'akun Muslim aidhan lakinni Talibu l-luga l-arabiyya

Lazim 'adris kithir :)

walla in al arabi taak khather menih
your really good at arabic im impressed but know one talks formal arabic except at prayer and the elders heres how our arabish is:
kos umo had al manuiki la ineek okhto i sharmuta
sho keefak
minih ana keefak
ana bahib al lama kteer
manufiq

translation:
stupid motherfucker that son of bitch, im gonna fuck his sister that whore(note in arabic and islamic culture men are protective of female relatives and saying youll fuck them is a grave insult that some times start blood feuds)
so how are you?
im good and you?
i love meat(also a very ridiculous song that popular in the middle east)
hypocrate(excellent insult to those who are important)
but heres the thing before the middle east met the west we killed each other all the time, no problem, now we get everyone we know over one insult meet the other group, trade insults and then go home its so sad, but in some place like saudi and lebanon we just get the knives, pipes, chairs(i saw a guy bite anothers guys finger off!) and go fuck each other up and whos left alive go and celebrate

Who is this he?


Who is stifling dissent?

Actually...I'm quite comfortable :)

look back a few pages you'll find it
also i wonder who he meant!?!?!?!
really wow i shudder at meeting you in a dark alley

Nope. Unless of course....

*reads belows*



From the tyrants that run the middle east :D

hey foregin groups stopped manipulating us we would'nt have these problems

look back a few pages you'll find it

Tell me.

also i wonder who he meant!?!?!?!

Are we talking about Amadinejad?

really wow i shudder at meeting you in a dark alley

Um ok?

Oh brother. And people wonder why we do not like people overseas. :headbang:

hey is it true that when marines are trained they kill a member of their family to finish training cus some guys i know keep telling me that, and im like no thats bull

hey foregin groups stopped manipulating us we would'nt have these problems

Tell the oil people to stop producing oil...oh wait. That would ruin the world economy. Um...tell the extremists to stop provoking us and we won't fight there.

Tell me.


Are we talking about Amadinejad?


Um ok?

we got into an argument about stifling dissent
i dont think so
im meant by cold is that you have seem to have no problems with innocents getting hurt

hey is it true that when marines are trained they kill a member of their family to finish training cus some guys i know keep telling me that, and im like no thats bull

Since I had an Uncle in the Marines, yes it is totally false that marines kill a member of their family to complete training.

we got into an argument about stifling dissent

Yep

i dont think so

Then who are we talking about?

im meant by cold is that you have seem to have no problems with innocents getting hurt

No shit sherlock. I know what you were referring to. As to innocents getting hurt, no I do have a problem with that but I also try to look at all the facts before jumping to conclusions that they are innocent.

Tell the oil people to stop producing oil...oh wait. That would ruin the world economy. Um...tell the extremists to stop provoking us and we won't fight there.
h that would be americas and britains fault you see, after WW1 the hashemites(family of the prophet peace be upon his name) took over syria, iraq, palestine, jordan,lebanon, and the hejaz, now the syrian king got kicked out and moved to iraq, that king moved to jordan, now while this was happening, the al saud a bandit tribe was busy taking over saudi arabia, now since the british were getting tired of the hashemites who were pissed about giving palestine to the jews(they were promised it, and so were the jews, but the jews got it) they supported al saud who kicked the hashemites out of hejaz, later on thank to americas oil need the al saud managed to get enough money to spread their extremist views around the islamic world(before this they were a minority even in saudi!), thus resulting in the mess we have now

:Oh brother. And people wonder why we do not like people overseas. :headbang:

well if you were nicer to use we wouldn't be doing this:
:mp5:
:sniper:
:gundge:
:upyours:
we would be doing this:
;)
:)
:p
:D

Um...tell the extremists to stop provoking us and we won't fight there.The provocation of and interference with the countries the extremists come from was started by the US. What business has the US ever had in the Middle East? They made alliances with the most evil regimes just for their economic benefit. The US is teh shit and need not wonder about the overdue payback.

The provocation of and interference with the countries the extremists come from was started by the US. What business has the US ever had in the Middle East? They made alliances with the most evil regimes just for their economic benefit. The US is teh shit and need not wonder about the overdue payback.

Uh for starters, just a little helping out here, to say somethings "the shit" means its a good, cool thing. Judging from the rest of your post, I highly doubt thats what you meant.

If you wanna start with interference with each other.....we could go back millenia. And I really think that this "interference" started with the destruction of the Ottaman Empire in WWI. And they got the same treatment everyone else did.

Although I agree with the evil regimes part. The Saudi Alliance is possibly the most unholy bastard child i can think of. Whabbism is hypocritical, and were only friends with them because they produce oil. But maybe thats just some republicans vaules, then again. After all, by those standards, we should be falling head over heels with Hugo Chavez.....

translation:
stupid motherfucker that son of bitch, im gonna fuck his sister that whore.Who said that? :mad:

I am going to take personal issue against threats targeting other poster's families.
It is not going pass unchallenged.

The provocation of and interference with the countries the extremists come from was started by the US. What business has the US ever had in the Middle East?

Except that Osama's beef on us is that we were in Saudi Arabia at the request of the Saudi King who was scared shitless of Saddam Hussein who invaded Kuwait. In the 80s, we were trying to help those trapped in the Lebanonese Civil War and Hezbollah (may they burn in hell) blew up not just our barracks, but the French's as well. So please tell me what we did to deserve our Barracks being bombed in Beirut?

They made alliances with the most evil regimes just for their economic benefit. The US is teh shit and need not wonder about the overdue payback.

At the expense of Innocent civilians?

So please tell me what we did to deserve our Barracks being bombed in Beirut?Having barracks in Beirut.
a foreign army that stays IS an occupation army.

(but.. but..) the Saudi King who was scared.. (blah blah blah) I dont give a-flying-shit whether your friendly dictator -that you love so much- is begging you to help him secure his bloody dictatorship.

At the expense of Innocent civilians?Yes, US interference always happens at the expense of innocent civilians. E.g. supporting the Shah meant working against the Iranian people. And without US support for the Shah most likely there would not have been an Islamic Revolution either.

Yes,

You sir. Are an idiot. Though we already knew that you were one. Why should innocents be killed?

US interference always happens at the expense of innocent civilians. E.g. supporting the Shah meant working against the Iranian people. And without US support for the Shah most likely there would not have been an Islamic Revolution either.

So what does that have to do with killing innocent men, women, and children through terrorist attacks?

Um yes, about the Beriut Barracks. The majority of the world thought there needed to be a peacekeeping force in Lebanon. We provided troops there. So according to you, we somehow convinced a majority of the world of a pressing need (something we've never been good at), then tried to out manipulate the UN to try and seriously occupy Lebanon? Wow. We must be a lot better than I thought.

Also, OceanDrive2, I belive, unless I'm much mistaken, that Whabbis have roughly as much control in Saudi Arabia as the Royal Family. Thatd make it pretty hard for a dictator to take control, wouldnt it?

Also, OceanDrive2, I belive, unless I'm much mistaken, that Whabbis have roughly as much control in Saudi Arabia as the Royal Family. Thatd make it pretty hard for a dictator to take control, wouldnt it?#1 I dont understand what you are saying.

#2 Whatever you are saying.. you are posting out of your imgination.. because I have never posted the word "whabbis"... whabbtever that is. :D

#3 My main PoV on Saudi Arabia is that your beloved King.. is a bloody Dictator nothing more nothing less.

You sir. Are an idiot. Though we already knew that you were one. Why should innocents be killed? You sir, are most rude.
You asked whether US interference and forming alliances with certain regimes happened at the expense of innocent civilians. And my answer to that is yes.

So what does that have to do with killing innocent men, women, and children through terrorist attacks?Do you know how many people were killed by the US backed Shah regime?

Um yes, about the Beriut Barracks. The majority of the world thought there needed to be ...and just who told YOU.. what the-Majority-of-the-World thinks?

FOX/CNN/AP ?
:rolleyes:

Sorry by Wahabbism i mean Salafism. I was told it was called Wahabbism, and did not even know that there was any other name. Apperantley its used as an insult. Diidnt mean it that way

Sorry by Wahabbism i mean Salafism. I was told it was called Wahabbism, and did not even know that there was any other name. Apperantley its used as an insult. Diidnt mean it that wayI wouldnt know if these are insults because I do not speak arabic.. but No I did not use any of these words.

Like I said my main issue with SaudiA. is the the bloody Dictatorship

You sir, are most rude.
You asked whether US interference and forming alliances with certain regimes happened at the expense of innocent civilians. And my answer to that is yes.

Actually no that was not what I said. When I said "At the expense of civilians" I was referring to the terror attacks done by muslim fundamentalists.

Do you know how many people were killed by the US backed Shah regime?

I do not have the numbers off hand but I assume you have a point to support the slaughter of innocent men, women, and children at the hands of terrorists?

No, I thought it was a UN peacekeeping force. I was wrong. But since Ive failed to notice numerous complaints about it, Im going to assume people either
A. Thought it was a good Idea
or
B. Didnt care

And who ever said that I loved the king? I think Saudi Arabia is (once again) the biggest hypocrite the world knows today.

And I'm sorry, but I gotta tell you, you kinda lose your message when you compare Fox to CNN/AP in terms of bias against the middle east.

And who told you that all Americans loved Saudi Arabia?
Al Jazeera?;)

No, I thought it was a UN peacekeeping force. I was wrong. But since Ive failed to notice numerous complaints about it, Im going to assume people either
A. Thought it was a good Idea
or
B. Didnt care

And who ever said that I loved the king? I think Saudi Arabia is (once again) the biggest hypocrite the world knows today.

And I'm sorry, but I gotta tell you, you kinda lose your message when you compare Fox to CNN/AP in terms of bias against the middle east.

And who told you that all Americans loved Saudi Arabia?
Al Jazeera?;)

:eek: wtf ??

jesus christ howd i post so many times? Stupid computer acting up again...sorry about that

just go back and delete them all 'cept for one.. and it was probably the server not your pc

it's not about the hair, but what is beneath the hair that matters


unfortunately,
too many people a) still take these buffoons in dc at the word,
and b) think everyone is out to get them, including Iranians.


even if Mr A is ignorant of homosexuality,
the country he is prez of and which he has no control over foreign affairs
or security matters has passed all inspections by the International Atomic Engery A....(IAEA) to not be enriching uranium to weapons grade. which is very different from using uranium for fuel. (not that any country should use that very NON-green fuel, but...it's not weapons)

Why are you defending this clown? Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) i assume.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_Derangement_Syndrome
We will not attack Iran. We will encourage the already angry Iranian people to rise up against their theocracy with the help of sacnctions gripping their economy OR Israel will attack them after they test their nuke.

We will not attack Iran.At least one Republican Presidential candidate is living on a prayer :D

Republican Senator prays we don't go to war with Iran (http://news.search.yahoo.com/search/news;_ylt=A0WTTklJdxZHswcAcCfQtDMD;_ylu=X3oDMTBhNjRqazhxBHNlYwNzZWFyY2g-?p=republican+prays+no+war)

At least one Republican Presidential candidate is living on a prayer :D

Republican Senator prays we don't go to war with Iran (http://news.search.yahoo.com/search/news;_ylt=A0WTTklJdxZHswcAcCfQtDMD;_ylu=X3oDMTBhNjRqazhxBHNlYwNzZWFyY2g-?p=republican+prays+no+war)

As no war is going to happen...the Senator's prayer will come true.

Why are you defending this clown? Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) i assume.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_Derangement_Syndrome
We will not attack Iran. We will encourage the already angry Iranian people to rise up against their theocracy with the help of sacnctions gripping their economy OR Israel will attack them after they test their nuke.

no,
because the democrats are just as war mongery and imperialist and corporate sock sucking as the repugs.
they are two sides of the very same coin

We will encourage the already angry Iranian people to rise up against their theocracy with the help of sacnctions gripping their economy OR Israel will attack them after they test their nuke.A group of Iranian citizens are willing to side with US-and-Israel against AhmedJihad?

and just what % of the Iranian population is this group?
51%?
33%?
10%
1%

use your brain to analyze the situation and take a guess..
give us your best shot.

Who said that? :mad:

I am going to take personal issue against threats targeting other poster's families.
It is not going pass unchallenged.

uh dude i was giving transaltion from arabish to english

Except that Osama's beef on us is that we were in Saudi Arabia at the request of the Saudi King who was scared shitless of Saddam Hussein who invaded Kuwait. In the 80s, we were trying to help those trapped in the Lebanonese Civil War and Hezbollah (may they burn in hell) blew up not just our barracks, but the French's as well. So please tell me what we did to deserve our Barracks being bombed in Beirut?



At the expense of Innocent civilians?

first of all hezballoh rocks mashi second of all sadam husain is not stupid enough to invade saudi cus then definatly the us would kick his ass, and so what, peacekeeping forces!?!?!!?!! they did not do shit

Well I think the idea of war with Iran was killed off by the sheer stupidity of the idea itself, mostly thought up by GOP 'armchair commandos'.

first of all hezballoh rocks

Despite the fact that their militant wing is actually illegal, supposed to be disarmed. They also started a war with Israel and was firing within civilian populations which is illegal as well. Yea they rock alright :rolleyes:

second of all sadam husain is not stupid enough to invade saudi cus then definatly the us would kick his ass, and so what, peacekeeping forces!?!?!!?!! they did not do shit

What could they do? I mean, Hezbollah blew up both the French and American barracks and all we were doing was trying to help civilians. Yep. Another strike against Hezbollah.

Hezbollah are great, death to the Zionazi empire!

Hezbollah are great, death to the Zionazi empire!

I already know you support the deaths of innocents.

I already know you support the deaths of innocents.

Innocent? 'Israel' is a giant barracks of murdering Zionazi troops.

Innocent? 'Israel' is a giant barracks of murdering Zionazi troops.

Oh brother. :rolleyes: And the anti-semite is at it already.

You a know a prince? You do realize that there are many princes of Kuwait. That's rich. Why should I believe that you know a Prince of Kuwait?

It's really not that unlikely. As you point out, there are many princes in Kuwait. I know a Bahraini princess who, strangely enough, I met while we were college students in Texas. Not all princes and princesses are royal, oftentimes, as in the case of the one I know, it is because someone in the family is given the title because of their importance to that nation.

Oh brother. :rolleyes: And the anti-semite is at it already.

Anti-semite implies criticism based on racial considerations, my criticism is actions and Zionazi ideology.

Anti-semite implies criticism based on racial considerations, my criticism is actions and Zionazi ideology.

Except that you would love to see all jews killed but that's ok.

Except that you would love to see all jews killed but that's ok.

All Zionists dead, because they follow a nazi ideology, not because of biological differences.

All Zionists dead, because they follow a nazi ideology, not because of biological differences.

OH brother. I'm not going to bother saying what I'm thinking.

Innocent? 'Israel' is a giant barracks of murdering Zionazi troops.

uh im arab and i think thats stretching it:confused:

uh im arab and i think thats stretching it:confused:

RP! Meet AP. AP! Meet RP!

That really is stretching it. Im assuming that your saying the state of Isreal is commiting a genocide against all Arabs? If thats true than theyre doing the worst job Ive ever seen. 25% of their population is Arabic

Despite the fact that their militant wing is actually illegal, supposed to be disarmed. They also started a war with Israel and was firing within civilian populations which is illegal as well. Yea they rock alright :rolleyes:



What could they do? I mean, Hezbollah blew up both the French and American barracks and all we were doing was trying to help civilians. Yep. Another strike against Hezbollah.

a its a national resistance group all they want is a small piece of land, and two isreal started the war, it was supposed to be a trade off of 2 solders for 3 lebanese, 3 i believe that your not supposed to hit civilan populations, so answer
you were helping civlians thats rich the usa does not do anything without getting something in return. while andras takes it a farther than many people, you are blatantly pro isreal and anti arab

That really is stretching it. Im assuming that your saying the state of Isreal is commiting a genocide against all Arabs? If thats true than theyre doing the worst job Ive ever seen. 25% of their population is Arabic

Its AP. He's our resident anti-semite.

That really is stretching it. Im assuming that your saying the state of Isreal is commiting a genocide against all Arabs? If thats true than theyre doing the worst job Ive ever seen. 25% of their population is Arabic

i know give us 10 years and a lot of viagra and we'd be isreal.

Its AP. He's our resident anti-semite.

ap why do you hate my people?

RP! Meet AP. AP! Meet RP!

HI *waves*

a its a national resistance group

Resisting against what? The Israelis left in 2000.

all they want is a small piece of land, and two isreal started the war,

For which I will say bullshit.

it was supposed to be a trade off of 2 solders for 3 lebanese,

You do realize that Hezbollah violated Israeli territory to kidnap IDF Soldiers while launching a rocket attack on Israel? So tell me again what is Hezbollah resisting again?

3 i believe that your not supposed to hit civilan populations, so answer

Tell that to Hezbollah. Under international law, if one side is using purely civilian buildings to launch attacks from, those buildings are no longer declared untouchable. The IDF had full right to do what they did only in regards to where the attacks were coming from. I mean everyone knows that Hezbollah was using them for human shields which is also against International Law.

you were helping civlians thats rich the usa does not do anything without getting something in return.

Ok. Now I know you are brainwashed.

while andras takes it a farther than many people, you are blatantly pro isreal and anti arab

bullshit. Prove I am anti-Arab.

Resisting against what? The Israelis left in 2000.
For which I will say bullshit.

You do realize that Hezbollah violated Israeli territory to kidnap IDF Soldiers while launching a rocket attack on Israel? So tell me again what is Hezbollah resisting again?

Tell that to Hezbollah. Under international law, if one side is using purely civilian buildings to launch attacks from, those buildings are no longer declared untouchable. The IDF had full right to do what they did only in regards to where the attacks were coming from. I mean everyone knows that Hezbollah was using them for human shields which is also against International Law.

Ok. Now I know you are brainwashed.

bullshit. Prove I am anti-Arab.

uh the sheba farms(still occupied, and support of the intifada)
also isreal continually violates other countries terrritories(syria,jordan,iraq,lebanon,egypt, setting up puppet goverment) well you cant consider the fact that the ENTIRE poplulation of isreal will at one point of their lives be in the military so, its basically attacking military groups,
and as to your human shield: a robber has taken a pregnant women hostage, you shoot her in the hopes of hitting the robber, also if the airforce had any brains they would know that would only strengthen support ,and know im not brainwashed this is simple facts, you whine about democracy but how many democracies have you taken out to suit your needs. uh you condened the bombing of innocet arabs and their killings how the hell is that no anti arab!!!!!!!

uh the sheba farms(still occupied, and support of the intifada)

Yep. Belongs to SYRIA and NOT LEBANON. So what are they resisting against?

also isreal continually violates other countries terrritories(syria,jordan,iraq,lebanon,egypt, setting up puppet goverment)

Wait what? Egypt? They occupy no egyptian land! Jordan? They do not occupy any Jordinian land either. Iraq? Only the nuclear reactor. Syria and Lebanon? Syria attacked Israel as did Lebanon. Also, the PLO launched attacks into Israel sparking the first incursion into Lebanon which lasted 20 years. Then we have Hezbollah which resisted occupation (which is their right though I condemn the attacks against civilians). Then in 2000, Israel pulled out of Lebanon (which is what they should have done years ago) but had to go back in because of Hezbollah's frequent rocket attacks into Israel. So tell me, what is Hezbollah resisting as Israel was NOT on Lebanonese soil?

well you cant consider the fact that the ENTIRE poplulation of isreal will at one point of their lives be in the military so, its basically attacking military groups,

Oh brother. So you support the killings of innocent men, women and children then?

and as to your human shield: a robber has taken a pregnant women hostage, you shoot her in the hopes of hitting the robber, also if the airforce had any brains they would know that would only strengthen support ,and know im not brainwashed this is simple facts, you whine about democracy but how many democracies have you taken out to suit your needs. uh you condened the bombing of innocet arabs and their killings how the hell is that no anti arab!!!!!!!

Ah good. Now we're getting to your anger problem. 1) It is called a hostage situation. 2) As to the air force, someone is shooting at them from a civilian location and from a civilian building, under I.L., the air force was correct in bombing the area and it is not a war crime. The people who fired from said location are the ones in violation of International law. 3) Prove that I am anti-Arab. You still have yet to show proof beyond a shadow of a doubt. 4) You sir, are showing your true colors. I really hoped that you would be different than most. I see I was wrong. *sighs* :(

In any event, in the question and answer session following his talk at Columbia, the Iranian president said: "I'm not saying that it [the Holocaust] didn't happen at all. This is not the judgment that I'm passing here."



for those with an open mind,
able to read beyond sound bites,
and wanting to see more of things Mr A supposedly said,
read on to the link


Anti-Semitism. Don't settle for imitations.
http://members.aol.com/bblum6/aer50.htm







That should put the matter to rest. But of course it won't. Two days later, September 26, a bill (H. R. 3675) was introduced in Congress "To prohibit Federal grants to or contracts with Columbia University", to punish the school for inviting Ahmadinejad to speak. The bill's first "finding" states that "Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for the destruction of the State of Israel {BUT HE DID NOT}, a critical ally of the United States."

That same day, comedian Jay Leno had great fun ridiculing Ahmadinejad for denying that the Holocaust ever happened "despite all the eye-witness accounts".

How long before the first linking of Iran with 9-11? Or has that already happened? How long before democracy and freedom bombs begin to fall upon the heads of the Iranian people? All the charges of anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial, along with other disinformation, are of course designed to culminate in this new crime against humanity.

He held a whole conference over it. Your right he didn't say it didn't happen he said that it was way over exaggerated. But he does call for the destruction of Israel. Listen to one of his speeches before his own people. Do you hear what they chant when he stops speaking, it goes a something like this, "Death to Israel, Death to America." Also he has many times called for the destruction of Israel, and I quote, "Israel must be wiped off the map", "Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury...". He said these things. Does this sound like someone who isn't anti-Semitic?

Having barracks in Beirut.
a foreign army that stays IS an occupation army.

I dont give a-flying-shit whether your friendly dictator -that you love so much- is begging you to help him secure his bloody dictatorship.

:D

it's not about the hair, but what is beneath the hair that matters


unfortunately,
too many people a) still take these buffoons in dc at the word,
and b) think everyone is out to get them, including Iranians.


even if Mr A is ignorant of homosexuality,
the country he is prez of and which he has no control over foreign affairs
or security matters has passed all inspections by the International Atomic Engery A....(IAEA) to not be enriching uranium to weapons grade. which is very different from using uranium for fuel. (not that any country should use that very NON-green fuel, but...it's not weapons)

Why do we have to take the buffoon in Iran at his word?

Why can't we disregard both the buffoons in Iran and D.C.?

You do realize that Hezbollah violated Israeli territory to kidnap IDF Soldiers while launching a rocket attack on Israel? So tell me again what is Hezbollah resisting again?.

Well there are still a lot of lebanese residing in Israeli prisons

Tell that to Hezbollah. Under international law, if one side is using purely civilian buildings to launch attacks from, those buildings are no longer declared untouchable. The IDF had full right to do what they did only in regards to where the attacks were coming from. I mean everyone knows that Hezbollah was using them for human shields which is also against International Law.

Morally this is extremely questionable, to say the least... Israel should have spared the popluation as much as they could. However they did not... Using cluster bombs??! :eek: what on earth were they thinking?? The officials responsible should be put on trial...

Its AP. He's our resident anti-semite.

He's also NSG's official Court Jester

He isn't our only anti-semite. He joins the ranks of UB, OD, and a few other clowns.

Hezbollah are great, death to the Zionazi empire!

You are a sick entity. I don't think any human being can have the disregard of human life you have.

Well there are still a lot of lebanese residing in Israeli prisons

Yep that's true! Not a reason to launch a war over.

Morally this is extremely questionable, to say the least... Israel should have spared the popluation as much as they could. However they did not... Using cluster bombs??! :eek: what on earth were they thinking?? The officials responsible should be put on trial...

For what? Defending themselves?

Yep. Belongs to SYRIA and NOT LEBANON. So what are they resisting against?

Wait what? Egypt? They occupy no egyptian land! Jordan? They do not occupy any Jordinian land either. Iraq? Only the nuclear reactor. Syria and Lebanon? Syria attacked Israel as did Lebanon. Also, the PLO launched attacks into Israel sparking the first incursion into Lebanon which lasted 20 years. Then we have Hezbollah which resisted occupation (which is their right though I condemn the attacks against civilians). Then in 2000, Israel pulled out of Lebanon (which is what they should have done years ago) but had to go back in because of Hezbollah's frequent rocket attacks into Israel. So tell me, what is Hezbollah resisting as Israel was NOT on Lebanonese soil?

Oh brother. So you support the killings of innocent men, women and children then?

Ah good. Now we're getting to your anger problem. 1) It is called a hostage situation. 2) As to the air force, someone is shooting at them from a civilian location and from a civilian building, under I.L., the air force was correct in bombing the area and it is not a war crime. The people who fired from said location are the ones in violation of International law. 3) Prove that I am anti-Arab. You still have yet to show proof beyond a shadow of a doubt. 4) You sir, are showing your true colors. I really hoped that you would be different than most. I see I was wrong. *sighs* :(
uh syria itself says that the area belongs to lebanon, are you denying their soverign right to give land to other goverments?
Violated!!!!!! sinai, karameh, golan heights, south lebanon, release of prisoners, support of the intifada..., and no i do not support the killings of innocent men, women and children. why the fuck they used cluster bombs huh, i was there i saw the fucking hits!!!!!!!!, you are anti arab cus you are condoning the bombing of arab populated centers with cluster bombs!!!!!!
showing my true colours? wtf

Yep that's true! Not a reason to launch a war over.


For what? Defending themselves?

genius that was the isreali excuse!?!?!?!?
fighters defend bombers attack, its not defending if you bomb innocent civilans of whom i was one i mean come on there is now way you can support the cluster bombing of innocent civilians, and also please explain the need t destroy the entire lebanese economy? while they were at it

uh syria itself says that the area belongs to lebanon, are you denying their soverign right to give land to other goverments?

And where is the appropriate paperwork giving this area to Lebanon? I mean...it has to be with the UN somewhere.

Violated!!!!!! sinai, karameh, golan heights, south lebanon, release of prisoners, support of the intifada...,

Returned when Israel and Egypt signed a peace agreement. Golan Heights? Still under occupation but was taken in a war that is still going on. South Lebanon? Not under occupation because Israel pulled out. Also where was the attacks coming from? South Lebanon. Who violated what? Well I could go on on that one alone but it would require an entirely new thread unless of course you want me to point out to you that Lebanon was part of the Arab coalition that attacked Israel during the Israeli War for independence. Oh and let us not forget the 2nd arab-Israeli war as well.

and no i do not support the killings of innocent men, women and children.

Good.

why the fuck they used cluster bombs huh, i was there i saw the fucking hits!!!!!!!!, you are anti arab cus you are condoning the bombing of arab populated centers with cluster bombs!!!!!!

Um lets see. I do not support the attacking of civilian centers except when those same civilian population centers are being used as weapons platforms. That makes those population centers legal military targets. I suggest you read up on International Law. It is quite clear that when civilian centers are being used for military purposes (like what Hezbollah was using them for), that makes those targets fair game.

showing my true colours? wtf

Answer me this. Are arabs blameless in the region's troubles?

genius that was the isreali excuse!?!?!?!?

For which action? The Israeli War for independence? The Yom Kiper War? The 7 Day War? The 1st Lebanon Incursion? 2nd Lebanon Incursion? Tell me which one you want!

fighters defend bombers attack, its not defending if you bomb innocent civilans of whom i was one i mean come on there is now way you can support the cluster bombing of innocent civilians, and also please explain the need t destroy the entire lebanese economy? while they were at it

Well lets see....they let Hezbollah get away with the attacks against Israel for starters. They have done nothing to curb them (still not which is a violation of UN Security Resolutions). Not to mention it was this same economy that was assisting hezbollah as well. So yea...

fighters defend bombers attack

lol wut

Oversimplifying of warfare much?

And where is the appropriate paperwork giving this area to Lebanon? I mean...it has to be with the UN somewhere.
The UN has nothing to do with it

Returned when Israel and Egypt signed a peace agreement. Golan Heights? Still under occupation but was taken in a war that is still going on. South Lebanon? Not under occupation because Israel pulled out. Also where was the attacks coming from? South Lebanon. Who violated what? Well I could go on on that one alone but it would require an entirely new thread unless of course you want me to point out to you that Lebanon was part of the Arab coalition that attacked Israel during the Israeli War for independence. Oh and let us not forget the 2nd arab-Israeli war as well.
ok you got me on that but you have to admit that the response to the kidnapping was overkill, and what did they gain?

Um lets see. I do not support the attacking of civilian centers except when those same civilian population centers are being used as weapons platforms. That makes those population centers legal military targets. I suggest you read up on International Law. It is quite clear that when civilian centers are being used for military purposes (like what Hezbollah was using them for), that makes those targets fair game.
they do not make them legal military centers, cus by your definition due to the fact all isreali towns serve as population centers for soon to be military boys, they serve as legal targets, by your defintion you just condoned the wars, intifadas and rpg attacks!:)

Answer me this. Are arabs blameless in the region's troubles?
uh hell no, we screwed up just as bad as the americans and the isrealis did

lol wut

Oversimplifying of warfare much?

no just stating the uses of fighters and bombers in offensive and defensive warfare

For which action? The Israeli War for independence? The Yom Kiper War? The 7 Day War? The 1st Lebanon Incursion? 2nd Lebanon Incursion? Tell me which one you want!
the july 2006 war...

Well lets see....they let Hezbollah get away with the attacks against Israel for starters. They have done nothing to curb them (still not which is a violation of UN Security Resolutions). Not to mention it was this same economy that was assisting hezbollah as well. So yea...

yea what you support hurting innocent arab civilians thus proving my point of being anti-arab

The UN has nothing to do with it

Read the charter sometime. You might be surprised to note that all treaties have to be registered with the United Nations and since the UN states that the Sheba farms is Syrian soil and NOT lebanonese, it makes it Syrian soil until such time as the appropriate paperwork is signed, sealed, and delivered to the United Nations.

ok you got me on that but you have to admit that the response to the kidnapping was overkill, and what did they gain?

Truthfully? Nothing.

they do not make them legal military centers, cus by your definition due to the fact all isreali towns serve as population centers for soon to be military boys, they serve as legal targets, by your defintion you just condoned the wars, intifadas and rpg attacks!:)

Actually no. Unless of course weapons were being fired from them, then it makes them legal military targets.

uh hell no, we screwed up just as bad as isrealis did

Good. My faith in you is restored :)

no just stating the uses of fighters and bombers in offensive and defensive warfare

Fighters can't be used for offensive warfare?

Bombers can't be used for defensive warfare?

Add this to the fact that technically, Israel doesn't have any 'bombers'...

the july 2006 war...

Ah! The one where Hezbollah crossed international boundaries with a rocket attack for confusion and kidnapped and killed IDF soldiers. Guess what? Where we come from, that's an act of war and Israel took it as such. Yep..no provocation there :rolleyes:

yea what you support hurting innocent arab civilians thus proving my point of being anti-arab

I am? Please prove it! Come on. Do not make me take back my comment about faith being restored in you.

Fighters can't be used for offensive warfare?

Bombers can't be used for defensive warfare?

Add this to the fact that technically, Israel doesn't have any 'bombers'...

Yep. They have Fighter/Attackers :D

Read the charter sometime. You might be surprised to note that all treaties have to be registered with the United Nations and since the UN states that the Sheba farms is Syrian soil and NOT lebanonese, it makes it Syrian soil until such time as the appropriate paperwork is signed, sealed, and delivered to the United Nations.
really, hmm that has to be the stupidest charter in the world!?!?!

Truthfully? Nothing.
then if you could see it, then how could the military command of a nation that has gone 10 wars have no idea that they would only lose, not gain?

Actually no. Unless of course weapons were being fired from them, then it makes them legal military targets.
actually yes due to the fact the towns populations, is what hold the armies ranks, it would seem legally the were military targets
Good. My faith in you is restored :)
why cus i know the truth?, unlike AP i dont rant without a reason

Fighters can't be used for offensive warfare?

Bombers can't be used for defensive warfare?

Add this to the fact that technically, Israel doesn't have any 'bombers'...

fighter stop bombers from bombing thus defensive
bombers attack enemy sompunds thus offensive
so no and no
how do you know they dont

really, hmm that has to be the stupidest charter in the world!?!?!

HAHA!! Could not say it better myself :D

then if you could see it, then how could the military command of a nation that has gone 10 wars have no idea that they would only lose, not gain?

Because its better to look at things from the outside than the inside.

actually yes due to the fact the towns populations, is what hold the armies ranks, it would seem legally the were military targets

Now it looks like we are advocating the return to the way things were during World War II when everyone was bombing civilian population centers. Hmm....nah. That's stupid. Why do that? I mean think of the civilians.

why cus i know the truth?, unlike AP i dont rant without a reason

And when rants are wrong?

fighter stop bombers from bombing thus defensive
bombers attack enemy sompunds thus offensive
so no and no
how do you know they dont

And what if bombers bomb formations that are invading said bomber's territory? is that still attacking or is that defending?

Ah! The one where Hezbollah crossed international boundaries with a rocket attack for confusion and kidnapped and killed IDF soldiers. Guess what? Where we come from, that's an act of war and Israel took it as such. Yep..no provocation there :rolleyes:
uh how does it count as an act of war, clearly if you want to provoc them into war wouldnt you have picked a better timing


I am? Please prove it! Come on. Do not make me take back my comment about faith being restored in you.

i did you said you supported bombing of arab civialian centers, however anyone should know about this about arabs:
any time you attack our woman and children, no matter if we started it, we just join the arab leader who is attacking the guy who attacked us

And what if bombers bomb formations that are invading said bomber's territory? is that still attacking or is that defending?

that is attacking which i said is the bomber's perogative

HAHA!! Could not say it better myself
thank you, also whens the last time we arabs listened to the UN
Because its better to look at things from the outside than the inside. [/QUOTE]
that makes no sense

Now it looks like we are advocating the return to the way things were during World War II when everyone was bombing civilian population centers. Hmm....nah. That's stupid. Why do that? I mean think of the civilians.?
ya but heres the thing, in islam all civilians are not to be hurt, but since all the people are in a spartan culture, that rule sort of goes out*grins sheepishly*

And when rants are wrong?
when they are illogical

uh how does it count as an act of war, clearly if you want to provoc them into war wouldnt you have picked a better timing

Tell that to Hezbollah who launched their rocket attack as cover for their cross border assault that killed nearly ten soldiers and kidnapped a couple of others.

i did you said you supported bombing of arab civialian centers, however anyone should know about this about arabs:

And if you bothered to look at my other posts, you would see that I support any attack on population centers that are being used for military purposes. I do not support intentional attacks on population centers that are not being used for military purposes.

any time you attack our woman and children, no matter if we started it, we just join the arab leader who is attacking the guy who attacked us

Oh brother...so you support say Syria if they attack Israel and Israel counter attacks by say bombing Damascus? That is precisely what you are saying. You do not care if an Arab country starts a war. You will support them regardless of facts.

that is attacking which i said is the bomber's perogative

Wrong. If bombers attack enemy formations that are on the bombers soil, it is defending their country. You lose.

thank you, also whens the last time we arabs listened to the UN

Upon checking...um...never!

Because its better to look at things from the outside than the inside.
that makes no sense

Looking from the outside, one sees far more than one does when they are on the inside.

ya but heres the thing, in islam all civilians are not to be hurt, but since all the people are in a spartan culture, that rule sort of goes out*grins sheepishly*

Actually...according to muslim culture, Jews and Christians are protected for we all come from the same people. It also speaks out against harming civilians but we all know that has been violated more times than one can count.

when they are illogical

HAHA!!

Tell that to Hezbollah who launched their rocket attack as cover for their cross border assault that killed nearly ten soldiers and kidnapped a couple of others..
uh do you expect a small milita to take on the regional superpower and win?

And if you bothered to look at my other posts, you would see that I support any attack on population centers that are being used for military purposes. I do not support intentional attacks on population centers that are not being used for military purposes..
population centers in isreal, all civilians are gonna join the military, thus defining them as targets

Oh brother...so you support say Syria if they attack Israel and Israel counter attacks by say bombing Damascus? That is precisely what you are saying. You do not care if an Arab country starts a war. You will support them regardless of facts.
uh i meant that if isreal attacked syria, and a war started all the people of syria would support the goverment cus we turn on outsiders first, and then we turn on our own

Wrong. If bombers attack enemy formations that are on the bombers soil, it is defending their country. You lose.

no since that land would be enemy occupied they would be attacking enemy territory

uh do you expect a small milita to take on the regional superpower and win?

Well if you listen to Hezbollah and the rest of the Arab press, they did.

population centers in isreal, all civilians are gonna join the military, thus defining them as targets

That's an AP argument. Its been debunked. The Rules of War are clear as to what is and is not a military target.

uh i meant that if isreal attacked syria, and a war started all the people of syria would support the goverment cus we turn on outsiders first, and then we turn on our own

That is not what you said. You said "no matter if we started it". Unless of course, you want to retract that statement. By stating this, you support the arab side even if they start it. Again, I will retract this if you retract the above statement.

no since that land would be enemy occupied they would be attacking enemy territory

Yup. You are trying to oversimplify warfare.

Upon checking...um...never!

Looking from the outside, one sees far more than one does when they are on the inside.

Actually...according to muslim culture, Jews and Christians are protected for we all come from the same people. It also speaks out against harming civilians but we all know that has been violated more times than one can count.

HAHA!!

ok then why be surprised if its not in the treaty book
oh i get it
i know but its so vague that anyone can translate it the way he wants.

Yup. You are trying to oversimplify warfare.

so ?

ok then why be surprised if its not in the treaty book

Because treaties have to be registered with the UN to be valid :D

oh i get it

:)

i know but its so vague that anyone can translate it the way he wants.

Now how can I argue that? Damn it RP. How am I supposed to get angry with a statement like this :(

Well if you listen to Hezbollah and the rest of the Arab press, they did..
well they did hold their own and thats impressive

That's an AP argument. Its been debunked. The Rules of War are clear as to what is and is not a military target. .
for some

That is not what you said. You said "no matter if we started it". Unless of course, you want to retract that statement. By stating this, you support the arab side even if they start it. Again, I will retract this if you retract the above statement.

fine lets retract this is giving me a headache anyway

well they did hold their own and thats impressive

I can agree to that!

for some

I can agree to that :)

fine lets retract this is giving me a headache anyway

Same here. LOL!!

Because treaties have to be registered with the UN to be valid
by the UN, which we really dont think highly of and never listen to?


Now how can I argue that? Damn it RP. How am I supposed to get angry with a statement like this :(

its ok

I can agree to that!



I can agree to that :)



Same here. LOL!!

thank you

I already know you support the deaths of innocents.Prove it.

It's really not that unlikely. As you point out, there are many princes in Kuwait. I know a Bahraini princess who, strangely enough, I met while we were college students in Texas. Not all princes and princesses are royal, oftentimes, as in the case of the one I know, it is because someone in the family is given the title because of their importance to that nation.Trying to use common sense with them? You are waiting your time, they are always right, because they are a "HISTORIAN" or a "MARINE".. or something like that..

For them, anyone criticizing Israel actions does support killing innocents and must be resident evil anti-Semite.. For them anyone wondering about inconsistencies about WW2 numbers is automatically Holocaust denier.

For them, anyone criticizing Israel actions does support killing innocents and must be resident evil anti-Semite.. For them anyone wondering about inconsistencies about WW2 numbers is automatically Holocaust denier.

Except the fact that the inconsistencies you speak of really do not exist. I'll take the word of an actual historian over the word of an anti-Israeli bigot who HAPPENS (coincidentally?) to be one of those proud, few, BRAVE souls that challenges holocaust numbers. Odd that it's always the rabid anti-Israelis who question the validity, huh?

Except the fact that the inconsistencies you speak of really do not exist. How many were killed at the Auschwitz concentration camp? preemptive: give approximative number if you wish.

How many were killed at the Auschwitz concentration camp?

Read up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aushwitz#Death_toll

Read up: *post wiki page* ..type your number.

If i wanted to joggle with Wiki numbers.. I would have used my Firefox.

How many were killed at the Auschwitz concentration camp? preemptive: give approximative number if you wish.

The camp commandant, Rudolf Höss, testifed at the Nuremberg Trials that 3 million people had died at Auschwitz during his stay as a commandant. Later he decreased his estimate to about 1.1 million. The death toll given by the Soviets and accepted by many was 4,000,000 people. This number was written on the plaques in the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum. The Museum revised this figure in 1990, and new calculations by Dr. Franciszek Piper now place the figure at 1.1 million[2] about 90 percent of them Jews from almost every country in Europe.[3] Most of the dead were killed in gas chambers using Zyklon B; other deaths were caused by systematic starvation, forced labor, lack of disease control, individual executions, and cruel medical experiments.

Answer your question?

Answer your question?read the post just atop yours?



BTW, what is your number Corneliu, this should be interesting because -you know- you are a "historian"

Answer your question?

Apparently quoting actual historical facts doesn't count. We need to give our own rough estimates and when they differ slightly, OD can then say, "SEE, look at the historical inconsistencies with the Holocaust!!!"

read the post just atop yours?
or you dont need to read it because you are a "historian"? ;)

So what is your number OD? I would love to know what your number is for the camp you want.

read the post just atop yours?



BTW, what is your number Corneliu, this should be interesting because -you know- you are a "historian"

Over 1,000,000. WOW!! Look at that, its about the same as accepted numbers. WOW!!

Apparently quoting actual historical facts doesn't count. We need to give our own rough estimates and when they differ slightly, OD can then say, "SEE, look at the historical inconsistencies with the Holocaust!!!"

Why do you think that OD has zero credibility around here :D

We need to give our own rough estimates and when they differ slightly, OD can then say, "SEE, look at the historical inconsistencies with the Holocaust!!!"Apparently you are scared to give post an approximative number because you too scared about your number being too different from what Corneliu could say.

Do not worry In my book, inconsistencies in the thousands are to be disregarded, inconsistencies in the tens-of-thousands are to be noted..

I am not ready to dismiss inconsistencies in the hundreds-of-thousands or in the millions.
Dont agree with me? sue me. I do NOT live in Germany/Austria. I get freedom of speech.

Still too scared? Then you can wait until Corneliu post a number and agree with him.. or if you are really insecure about yourself, you can always post something like "Over *,000,000".. The word "over" is going to cover an infinite number of answers.

For them anyone wondering about inconsistencies about WW2 numbers is automatically Holocaust denier.

Nothing wrong with questioning numbers especially if you have evidence to suggest mistakes.

However, when you question them with the intent of lessoning the event, that is pretty much a Holocaust denier.

So what number range makes the claims acceptable to you?

In my book, inconsistencies in the thousands are to be disregarded, inconsistencies in the tens-of-thousands are to be noted..

I am nor ready to dismiss inconsistencies in the hundreds-of-thousands or in the millions.

Dont agree with me? sue me. I do NOT live in Germany/Austria. I get freedom of speech.

What are these inconsistencies? How widely held are they? By which groups? What's your reason to believe the estimates are lower? Which evidence points to lower numbers? Why do you think there are inconsistencies? Could it be, as wikipedia said, that many records were destroyed by the Germans? Do you think that's true? If not, why? Where do you derive your numbers from? What are you basing your disagreement on?

You are the one challenging the numbers of the Holocaust, so you need to cough up some answers.

Apparently you are scared to give post an approximative number because you too scared about your number being too different from what Corneliu could say.

Um OD? NG and I posted the same numbers. You just rejected them.

Do not worry In my book, inconsistencies in the thousands are to be disregarded, inconsistencies in the tens-of-thousands are to be noted..

What do you want? An exact number? Not going to happen actually.

I am not ready to dismiss inconsistencies in the hundreds-of-thousands or in the millions.

And how do you know if it is an inconsistency or not?

Dont agree with me? sue me. I do NOT live in Germany/Austria. I get freedom of speech.

Actually..this is really irrelevent.

Still too scared? Then you can wait until Corneliu post a number and agree with him.. or if you are really insecure about yourself, you can always post something like "over **00000".. The word "over" is going to cover an infinite number of answers.

S/he and I posted the same numbers. You lose.

Nothing wrong with questioning numbers especially if you have evidence to suggest mistakes.I dont have any evidence that Jesus was a normal human being. and viceversa.
I dont have any evidence that Alexander was gay. and viceversa.
I dont have any evidence that there were way more than 300 spartans. and viceversa.
.

However, when you question them with the intent of lessoning the event..How many civilians have been killed in Iraq since we "liberated "them.
.
So what number range makes the claims acceptable to you?
I posted the range of acceptable inaccuracies at the post just atop yours.. I am not asking for exact numbers, just approximative numbers.

S/he and I posted the same numbers. You lose.You have posted the number "Over 1,000,000.".. which covers.. anything rally.. It can mean 1 million, 6millions, 8 millions, 11 millions, 20 millions, infinite millions..

but I guess that is how they tell to teach history at Historians school rite? ;)
Over 1,000,000.

S/he and I posted the same numbers. You lose.Prove that NewGenoa has posted a number, prove it with the quote function

I dont have any evidence that Jesus was a normal human being. and viceversa.
I dont have any evidence that Alexander was gay. and viceversa.
I dont have any evidence that there were way more than 300 spartans. and viceversa.


Kudos on a non-answer.


.
How many civilians have been killed in Iraq since we "liberated "them.
.


I thought we were talking about death figures at Auschwitz.


I posted the range acceptable of inconsistencies at the post just atop yours.. I am not asking for exact numbers, just approximative numbers.

I suspect you already have your answer so why not enlighten us?

Nothing wrong with questioning numbers especially if you have evidence to suggest mistakes.Kudos on a non-answer.It was an answer, let me spell it out:
The fact that I cannot prove God does exist does not forbid me to suggest he does exist.. and viceversa.

I suspect you already have your answer so why not enlighten us?I have absolutely no problem answering that, but would you answer the question I posted before you posted yours:

What is your Auschwitz approximative number?
BTW, I am on the record as having given the answer

Do I have to spell everything for you?
The fact that I cannot prove God does exist does not forbid me to suggest he does exist.. and viceversa.

I have absolutely no problem answering that, but would you answer the question I posted before you posted yours:


The fact God may or may not exist has no baring in the question of correcting Auschweitz death totals.

You may try to split hairs on my use of grammar but the fact remains. The claim was 4 million and if later records (aka Evidence) shows otherwise, there is nothing wrong with correcting the numbers.

What is your Auschwitz approximative number?

Well. Considering the Soviets tendency to inflate numbers(taking from battle records) and the probability of the Germans under-inflating records, I would SWAG somewhere between 2 and 3 million.

BTW, I am on the record as having given the answer
Ok why white text? There are 17 pages to sort through. Is it that hard to type a number?

Finally, number counts is nothing more then a red herring and a rather poor effort to diminish the event.

By your reasoning I could argue we don't have solid numbers to the amount of slaves brought over to the states so discussions about it are not really valid and apologies, etc are not warranted.

It was an answer, let me spell it out:
The fact that I cannot prove God does exist does not forbid me to suggest he does exist.. and viceversa.

Nice dodge with a non-answer

I have absolutely no problem answering that, but would you answer the question I posted before you posted yours:

Answer the question. Come on. We know you have a number. What is it?

somewhere between 2 and 3 million.
I have already given a different answer for this question.. but I am going to give an answer like yours, just to see how you deal with it..
"somewhere between 99thousands and 4 million." my on the record answer is different but not that much.



By your reasoning I could argue we don't have solid numbers to the amount of slaves brought over to the states so discussions about it are not really valid and apologies, etc are not warranted.apologies for the victims of slavery, and for the innocent victims of all wars, including WWII, are warranted.

So apologies to the Gypsies/Gays/Jews/Romo/slaves are warranted.
Discussions about it are warranted.

We know you have a number. You know?

No you dont.

You know?

No you dont.

That explains why you have not given a number then.

I have already given a different answer for this question.. but I am going to give an answer like yours, just to see how you deal with it..
"somewhere between 99thousands and 4 million." my on the record answer is different but not that much.


Interesting. 99000? So the Germans inflated their numbers as well?

Again the use of white text. So where do I find this elusive number you speak of?

It is interesting that you seem to declare it a non-event unless there are exact numbers?


apologies for the victims of slavery, and for the innocent victims of all wars, including WWII, are warranted.

So apologies to the Gypsies/Gays/Jews/Romo/slaves are warranted.
Discussions about it are warranted.

Ok. So why does 4 million vs 1 million dead beg the question of the existence and or purpose of the holocaust?

Again the use of white text. So where do I find this elusive number you speak of? You can deal with the answer I just gave you. Or, you can use the search functions to find my previous answers. I have answered multiple times. They are not that much different.
.
It is interesting that you seem to declare it a non-event unless there are exact numbers?I have never declared -any of the several war genocides- a non event.

Interesting. 99000?
...
So why does 4 million vs 1 million dead beg the question of the existence and or purpose of the holocaust?99k,1M,4M,6M 8M,20M,infiniteM do not question the existence or purposes.. any of these numbers do not question it.